At 14:00 11/12/2004, Doyle wrote:
Key here is the concept of rational. Historically the concept is clear in
the sense that if I hit the ceiling with anger I am not rational, but in
terms of current understanding of neuroscience, rationality is a peculiar
concept. It assumes something about information or knowledge that human
beings produce. I.e. primarily, feelings are not rational, they are
subjective. In order to talk about this issue then I think we have to amend
ML's comments at the juncture of rationality. While the concept of
information exchange is exactly what I agree with here, the key human
element of this model is conversation and how are we to account for
'irrational' features of conversation?
I think we are using different meanings of 'rational' here--- mine is more
concerned with the problem of how individual rationality (the focus of
neoclassical economists) yields-- given particular institutional
arrangements-- socially irrational outcomes.
ML,
..."demonstrate the social irrationality of those
institutions."...
Doyle,
As one can see ML's reliance on irrationality becomes a key criticism of
capitalist relations. That is most workers have no say so in production so
a disconnect to the whole of society happens. And a socialist society is
rationalist per ML.
ML,
What intellectual property rights do is to attempt to create an
artificial scarcity that will compel people to pay more for knowledge
than its actual cost of reproduction. Their purpose is to make what Marx
called the products of the social brain a source of private enrichment.
Doyle,
The concept of intellectual property rights does indeed lead to this
outcome, but capitalism may not require this to happen. For example, the
file sharing formats arose as business models for profit. No doubt private
enrichment is happening with those businesses as well, but the file sharing
structure can be incorporated into a business enterprise.
That particular entities may find a logic to (limited) sharing of knowledge
in the interest of profit is not at all contrary to the argument in the
paper--- nor, for that matter, that they would embrace, eg, the gratuitous
service of free software (as long as they don't have to provide gratuitous
services themselves).
cheers,
michael
Michael A. Lebowitz
Professor Emeritus
Economics Department
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6
Currently based in Venezuela. Can be reached at
Residencias Anauco Suites
Departamento 601
Parque Central, Zona Postal 1010, Oficina 1
Caracas, Venezuela
(58-212) 573-4111
fax: (58-212) 573-7724
