From: Sarah Marr (sarah.marr@dial.pipex.com)
Date: Mon Aug 12 1996 - 03:38:24 MDT
At 17:14 11/08/96 -0700, Max More wrote:
>I'd say governments are the result of a kind of SO, but they are not
>examples *of* SO. Spontaneously ordering processes can produce results that
>themselves are inimical to spontaneous order.
>
>Actually, if spontaneous order is to have any meaning, we have to restrict
>the processes that we characterize that way.
Max, aren't you therefore defining 'spontaneous order' on the basis of the
Extropian desirability of both the order and the process of achieving that
order? I, like you, am not sure that the process leading to central
government is one of spontaneous order, but if it _were_, how could we then
say that the result was not spontaneous order, merely because we didn't
agree with the nature of that order, or the way it was reached? The phrase
'spontaneous order' doesn't lend itself to such value judgements.
Sarah
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:42 MST