The Critiques: An Analysis - All Comments

re: Cultural Relativism, Ethical Positivism, and Human Reason

Brian J. Gladish — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 05:03:07 GMT

I don't understand how ethical relativism precludes evolution and the discovery of superior systems. Just because the amoeba could cope with its environment did not mean that new forms of life could not do it better.

You might find this post on my blog to be of interest: radicalliberal.blogspot.com/.../competition-as-discovery-procedure-for.html

The market as a conduit for exosomatic problem solving

Solreyus — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:55:03 GMT

After reading this blog post on Karl Poppers work, I was particularly interested in the way in which

re: An Example of the State of Higher Eduction

Daniel — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 02:57:51 GMT

My PoliSci 1 prof was a nut. I remember one day she walked into the classroom and said, "I've been thinking about the financial crisis for past few days. I figured it out. I was caused by greed."

re: Towards a Greater Understanding of Say’s Law

RayLopez — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:21:37 GMT

mises.org/.../123530.aspx

Thread on Say's Law

re: A Critique of Externalities

Thedesolateone — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:40:22 GMT

Excellent post.

But: A court in a free society may never presume to have calculated the "objective" value for the cost assumed by the externality-ed individual, and indeed, seeing as no crime has such a cost, no court could ever logically argue that it had achieved such a miraculous judgement. No, seeing as valuations are all subjective, the voluntarily accepted (by both parties) payment for an "externality" should be the accepted redress for a dispute.

For example, if one individual is having pollutants pumped into his river, and he takes the other individual to court, this is a property violation like any other, and the court's subjective judgement, so long as it is voluntarily acceded to by both individuals, will rule, whether or not it leads to a net gain in "total utility". (And I'm sure we would both, along with Rothbard, throw out the concept of "total utility", as utility is surely ordinal rather than cardinal).

re: An Example of the State of Higher Eduction

Thedesolateone — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 10:21:58 GMT

Oh, and by the way I liked your post. Economics and politics as taught to me is awful. It appalls me every step of the way. My economics teacher is a neo-Keynesian/monetarist.

re: An Example of the State of Higher Eduction

Thedesolateone — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 10:20:38 GMT

In reality it takes less than 50%, at least here in Britain. Labour has 100% of the power, but only 15-17% of the general population voted for Labour candidates in the 2005 general election. And given the fact that the Labour candidates are heavily whipped, the power essentially resides in a figure who was only voted for directly by less than 100,000 of a population of 60,000,000. Add to this the fact that Gordon was Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time, and that in essence he was only voted in as representative. If majoritarian democracy is bad - imagine how bad the minoritarian "democracy" we have here in Britain is.