[M]any utilitarian concepts are convenient, but not true. Most untrue things produce negative externalities. Most negative externalities cause others harm. Small things in large numbers produce vast consequences.
Form: Aphorism
-
Just Because It’s Useful Doesn’t Mean It’s True
[M]any utilitarian concepts are convenient, but not true. Most untrue things produce negative externalities. Most negative externalities cause others harm. Small things in large numbers produce vast consequences.
-
Utility Does Not Sanction Immorality
[M]any immoral things are convenient. The reason we refrain from them despite their convenience, is that when we agree to cooperate with others, we agree to avoid exporting costs onto them as individuals, and we agree not to pollute the commons and therefore export costs onto them as a group. There is no difference between polluting a stream, and composing and publishing a theory in non-operational (particularly experiential) language. Both are immoral.
-
Utility Does Not Sanction Immorality
[M]any immoral things are convenient. The reason we refrain from them despite their convenience, is that when we agree to cooperate with others, we agree to avoid exporting costs onto them as individuals, and we agree not to pollute the commons and therefore export costs onto them as a group. There is no difference between polluting a stream, and composing and publishing a theory in non-operational (particularly experiential) language. Both are immoral.
-
UTILITY DOES NOT SANCTION IMMORALITY Many immoral things are convenient. The rea
UTILITY DOES NOT SANCTION IMMORALITY
Many immoral things are convenient. The reason we refrain from them despite their convenience, is that when we agree to cooperate with others, we agree to avoid exporting costs onto them as individuals, and we agree not to pollute the commons and therefore export costs onto them as a group.
There is no difference between polluting a stream, and composing and publishing a theory in non-operational (particularly experiential) language. Both are immoral.
Source date (UTC): 2014-07-02 01:35:00 UTC
-
(Profound) While a failure to rely upon operational definitions in mathematics,
(Profound)
While a failure to rely upon operational definitions in mathematics, logic and philosophy may only be immoral, and in science unethical – in economics, politics and law it is criminal.
In Mathematics avoiding operationalism merely perpetuates an error; in logic and philosophy it is deceptive of both others and one’s self; in science wastes others’ time. But in economics, politics and law, failure to use operationalism creates theft.
That is the answer to the riddle Mises, Rothbard, and Hoppe couldn’t solve in economics and ethics. Nor Hayek and Popper and their followers in politics and philosophy. But then, neither did Bridgman and his followers in science, nor Brouwer and his followers in math. I don’t think the long list ending with Kripke solved it either in logic.
One cannot use this heavily loaded term ‘true’ as other than analogy without a constructive knowledge of its meaning. And the only meaning that is constructively possible is testimony: performative truth. All else is merely proof. And the quaint linguistic contrivance that conflates the most parsimonious possible theory with testimony is, much like multitudinous abuses of the verb to-be, nothing more than a means by which we obscure our ignorance as a means of making mere analogies as a substitute for truth claims. Only constructive proofs demonstrate that one possesses the knowledge to make a truth claim. Everything else is merely analogy.
Source date (UTC): 2014-07-01 13:21:00 UTC
-
“if one can demonstrate construction then all further expansions will consist of
—“if one can demonstrate construction then all further expansions will consist of increases in precision, not declarations of falsehood.”—-
I am pretty sure this is correct. But, how do I test it? Need to talk to Mokyr…..
Source date (UTC): 2014-06-29 23:14:00 UTC
-
“It is better to reduce our statements into actions or events that exist, rather
—“It is better to reduce our statements into actions or events that exist, rather than into objects or entities that we imagine”–
Source date (UTC): 2014-06-25 07:34:00 UTC
-
The Austrian intuition is “How can we best ethically facilitate the voluntary or
The Austrian intuition is “How can we best ethically facilitate the voluntary organization of production?” They Keynesian intuition is “How much unethical activity can the state get away with while maintaining the voluntary organization of production?”
In the mind of each advocate he seeks a moral end. The Austrian by ethical means. The Keynesian by Unethical means.
Source date (UTC): 2014-06-23 08:40:00 UTC
-
“You’re not a true libertarian” = “You do not believe in the one true god.”
“You’re not a true libertarian” = “You do not believe in the one true god.”
Source date (UTC): 2014-06-21 14:07:00 UTC