Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: Open Letter - Rev. 2

Expand Messages
  • Ofir Carny
    You already said why in your letter - you value reason, you can claim to value reason and then ignore all theoretic evidence, if you do, you lose the
    Message 1 of 11 , May 27 6:14 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      You already said why in your letter - you value reason, you can claim to value reason and then ignore all
      theoretic evidence, if you do, you lose the reasonable basis of your claims and left only with your opinions -
      nothing more.

      Ofir

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Shlomi Fish [mailto:shlomif@...]
      Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 2:01 PM
      To: philosophy-il@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: RE: Open Letter - Rev. 2

      I don't see why I should believe your theoreticans about it.

      ---
      Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
      Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
      Version: 6.0.362 / Virus Database: 199 - Release Date: 07/May/02



      ********************************************************
      This email has been scanned by Port Authority.

      ********************************************************
    • Shlomi Fish
      Hi! Please configure your mailer to cut lines properly. ... I beg your pardon, but I think theoretical ecidence is a contradiction. I don t have anything
      Message 2 of 11 , Jun 22, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi!

        Please configure your mailer to cut lines properly.

        On Mon, 27 May 2002, Ofir Carny wrote:

        > You already said why in your letter - you value reason, you can claim
        > to value reason and then ignore all theoretic evidence,

        I beg your pardon, but I think theoretical ecidence is a contradiction. I
        don't have anything against theories and theoreticans, but the only test
        for a theory is real-life.

        There are various economical theories out there, and some of them justify
        Laissez-Faire Capitalism. They all sound good on the surface, but may make
        a lot of hidden false assumptions, non-sequitors, improper modellings,
        etc.

        Which one is right can only be proven by trying each out on a real-life
        economy and seeing which one lives to its promises.

        > if you do, you lose the reasonable basis of your claims and left only
        with your opinions -
        > nothing more.
        >

        Like I said, some economists formulated pro-LFC theories, and you can read
        them if you like. 600 years ago, people believed the Sun and the
        other planets revolved around the Sun, and pointed to the writings of
        Aristotle and Ptolmey as "theoretical evidence". You cannot rule out that
        there might be a similar situation with Economical Science now.

        Regards,

        Shlomi Fish

        > Ofir
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Shlomi Fish [mailto:shlomif@...]
        > Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 2:01 PM
        > To: philosophy-il@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: RE: Open Letter - Rev. 2
        >
        > I don't see why I should believe your theoreticans about it.
        >
        > ---
        > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
        > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
        > Version: 6.0.362 / Virus Database: 199 - Release Date: 07/May/02
        >
        >
        >
        > ********************************************************
        > This email has been scanned by Port Authority.
        >
        > ********************************************************
        >
        >
        >
        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > philosophy-il-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >



        ----------------------------------------------------------------------
        Shlomi Fish shlomif@...
        Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/
        Home E-mail: shlomif@...

        He who re-invents the wheel, understands much better how a wheel works.
      • Chen Shapira
        ... Partially true. I d rather not have humans as guinea pigs if it can be avoided. The bugs in totalitarian communism were apparent to everyone but the
        Message 3 of 11 , Jun 23, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          > Which one is right can only be proven by trying each out on a
          > real-life
          > economy and seeing which one lives to its promises.

          Partially true. I'd rather not have humans as guinea pigs if it can be
          avoided.
          The "bugs" in totalitarian communism were apparent to everyone but the
          Bolshevics, before they began their 70 years experiment. This experiment
          should have never been carried out. Russia paid a terribly high price for
          their experiment, and I wouldn't want to see anything similar happens here.

          I guess the correct way is to filter the theories using theoretical tools,
          before taking them to the field.

          Thanks,
          Chen.
        • Shlomi Fish
          ... One question is what can you lose from implementing it. Laissez-Faire Capitalism specifically prohibits killing innocent people and gives the government
          Message 4 of 11 , Jun 23, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Chen Shapira wrote:

            >
            > > Which one is right can only be proven by trying each out on a
            > > real-life
            > > economy and seeing which one lives to its promises.
            >
            > Partially true. I'd rather not have humans as guinea pigs if it can be
            > avoided.
            > The "bugs" in totalitarian communism were apparent to everyone but the
            > Bolshevics, before they began their 70 years experiment. This experiment
            > should have never been carried out. Russia paid a terribly high price for
            > their experiment, and I wouldn't want to see anything similar happens here.
            >
            > I guess the correct way is to filter the theories using theoretical tools,
            > before taking them to the field.
            >

            One question is what can you lose from implementing it. Laissez-Faire
            Capitalism specifically prohibits killing innocent people and gives the
            government very little power to harrase the individuals. The worst case
            scenario if it takes effect, is that some individuals, organizations or
            companies will lose money, market share, or replace ownership. I also
            don't rule out the possibility of a gradual conversion to LFC, however
            such that allows continued gains.

            Another question is how much are our theoretical tools able. There are
            many ways to abuse or fool reason, and Economics and Politics are a place
            where it is very easy to do so. I'm not suggesting to use Humans as guinea
            pigs, but the fact is that they have been used this way by the current
            political powers, with only a moderate success in achieving propsperity
            for all benevlonet people. (and none at achieving biological immortality).

            An idea I'm toying with is voluntarily enacting a de-facto LFC. E.g: by
            starting a private school network, a chain of private hospitals, make money
            by giving Objectivistic lectures or presentations, etc. That way we
            can gradually convert to a de-facto Laissez-Faire regardless of what the
            government thinks or see fit.

            Regards,

            Shlomi Fish

            > Thanks,
            > Chen.
            >
            >
            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > philosophy-il-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            >
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
            >



            ----------------------------------------------------------------------
            Shlomi Fish shlomif@...
            Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/
            Home E-mail: shlomif@...

            "Let's suppose you have a table with 2^n cups..."
            "Wait a second - is n a natural number?"
          • Ofir Carny
            Wow. almost one month delay... I already forgot sending that message... Regards. ... From: Shlomi Fish [mailto:shlomif@vipe.technion.ac.il] Sent: Sunday, June
            Message 5 of 11 , Jun 26, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              Wow. almost one month delay...

              I already forgot sending that message...

              Regards.

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Shlomi Fish [mailto:shlomif@...]
              Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2002 5:51 AM
              To: philosophy-il@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: RE: Open Letter - Rev. 2


              > -----Original Message-----
              > From: Shlomi Fish [mailto:shlomif@...]
              > Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 2:01 PM
              > To: philosophy-il@yahoogroups.com
              > Subject: RE: Open Letter - Rev. 2
              >


              ********************************************************
              This email has been scanned by Port Authority.

              ********************************************************
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.