Hi Billy,

On Nov 1, 2011, at 12:56 PM, [email protected] wrote:

> How Not to Argue for Limited Government and Lower Taxes
> T. M. Scanlon
> This article is part of Libertarianism and Liberty, a forum on arguments for 
> libertarian policy conclusions.
> 
> Libertarians embrace liberty as their fundamental starting point. From this, 
> they advocate a program of limited government and lower taxes.
> 
> But it’s not clear how they get from their starting point to their policy 
> conclusion.

Very nice analysis, though I'm a little fuzzy about his conclusion.  

I also realized a fundamental flaw in Libertarian reasoning: the assumption 
that humans are rational.

We aren't.  The human brain isn't designed for rational calculation.  It is 
designed for *heuristics* -- determining behavior by matching patterns against 
the environment.

In fact, this is the only kind of system that can deal with the real world -- 
in the mathematical sense.  The world is real, not rational -- continuous 
floating-point numbers, not discrete integers.  The only robust way to cope 
with reality is to use some kind of fuzzy logic --- which leads to heuristics.  
Logic is one important heuristic, but frankly of limited validity, because it 
depends incredibly precisely on the initial conditions, and in complex systems 
the relation of outputs to inputs is generally chaotic not linear.  The mapping 
between the analog real world and the digital rational world -- 
analog-to-digital -- is really hard, and in fact one of the most difficult 
problems in computation.

The requirement for rational thinking is the requirement for perfect 
information.  Most libertarian utopias assume that everyone has access to 
sufficiently accurate information to decide for themselves.  But we don't. All 
information is imperfect, our time and attention is limited, and frankly our 
brains (mine included) are too stupid to really make effective decisions about 
*most* things that matter to us.  We *need* each other to provide abstractions 
and rules to simplify our lives to the point of manageability.

This is not to entirely dis rationality or logic -- heck, I make my living off 
of computers and production systems designed for maximum rationality.  But I 
never forget that they are the servants of human beings, and that all the 
interesting and difficult questions lie on the *analog* side of the equation.

I'm not quite sure where I'm going with this rant, but it struck me that this 
myth of rationality runs deep in Western thought, and I only now realized that 
the emperor has no clothes -- or at most, a headband.

DRB, Kevin -- as the Libertarian-leaning among us, what do you think?

-- Ernie P.

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to