Editor's note: humbleness = humility. On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 11:11 AM <thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dave, > > > > I think of mathematical abstractions as aspirations. > > > > Thanks for meeting me on my own ground, here. You will recall that my > original project was to try and discover what the metaphysical foundations > might be for my strong negative response to the idea that castes are > tolerable. What MUST I assume in order to think as I do. I have for many > years suspected that the fundamental difference between comfortable BHL’s > like me and comfortable conservatives is that we liberals see our comfort > as arising from good luck, and they see their comfort as arising from their > merit. Now, all metaphysics is non-sense, except insofar as it explains > and encourages an approach to other people that is … um …. Good. I think > than mine encourages me to approach people less wealthy than I, not as > people deserving of their fate but as people who have, in some sense, made > me a gift. Thus if there is kharma, it should be that the fortunate > “should” pay for the correction of any absence of randomness that > intergenerational transfers might inflict on the children of the poor. > > > > I lay this out in this naïve way because I thought it might provoke a > strong (and perhaps equally naïve) reaction from Sarbajit which would make > it immediately clear what different places we are coming from. Sarbajit > may not answer, in which case I am left having revealed my naivete > metaphysics to you bozos with all the consequences that must follow. > > > > Now remember, nobody ever claimed that all [persons] are created equal. > I think that we all will agree that all persons are created equal [ in] and > that they are endowed … with certain unalienable rights …” “– i.e., they > should be equal before the law. Our differences lie between these two > poles. I take the “and” seriously, and think that, above and beyond the > legal rights implied by the “endowment” conveyed by the second clause, they > have an obligation of humbleness and gratitude to all those what have their > good fortune possible, and that, at the very minimum that obligation should > be expressed in an overtly redistributive tax policy. > > > > But even if you don’t accept the further implications of severing the two > clauses in the way that I do, the notion of equality before the law demands > much more of the rich than they currently pay. For instance, when J. P. > Morgan IX runs over the faithful k-9 companion of the homeless Max Morgan > and Max decides to sue, J.P. can pay the requested amount, including Max’s > court costs and be done with it. If he decides to contest, then both > parties should pay into the court costs in proportion to their wealth and > the lawyers should be assigned at random. > > > > To the extent that the list is laced with libertarians, I don’t expect > much sympathy from the list for any of this. If one thing unites > libertarians, I would wager, it is the idea that people get what they > deserve, or at least, that they have the right to hang on to whatever they > get. > > > > So, Dave: What is your naïve metaphysics? > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > > > Nick Thompson > > thompnicks...@gmail.com > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Prof David West > *Sent:* Friday, August 27, 2021 11:17 AM > *To:* friam@redfish.com > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] "All [persons] are created equal" > > > > OK, curmudgeon and misanthrope that I am, I still must ask: > > > > Why this obsession with "equality?" > > > > Outside of the abstraction of math, no one thing is equal, in any sense, > to another, let alone all members of a set of things being equal to each > other. > > > > Narrowing our attention to human beings. it has already been noted that > the dimensions of potential inequality are myriad. It would be impossible > to "equalize" all dimensions simultaneously, so pick one, income for > example, and equalize on that dimension. > > > > To what end? What outcome would you expect to see? Why would it not be the > case that every possible outcome would result in persistent "inequalities" > because all the other dimensions of difference would swamp your > 'independent variable' of income? > > > > No two human beings are created equal, let alone all "men." (sic) But the > unfounded conviction that this must be 'true' demands the invention of myth > to explain why it is not. And those myths are, in my opinion, harmful and > divisive. > > > > I agree with Pieter (and probably everyone else on this list) that the > current state of income inequality is evil and untenable. But, I would > disagree with any means of rectifying the situation that is grounded in any > kind of myth of individual human "equality." > > > > davew > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 27, 2021, at 1:34 AM, Pieter Steenekamp wrote: > > If you just look at the world then "all [persons] are created equal" is > just nonsense. What I like to focus on is what can we as a society do, and > what can I personally do to move towards making all more equal? It's > obviously not practical to expect heaven on earth, but IMO the current > state of inequality is just not acceptable, but that's no reason to do > nothing. For now I just address the first one, what can we as a society do? > > > > The current state of politics is to a large extent driven by ideology and > I would like to see a movement towards a more practical, and humble > approach. Like an approach based on the philosophy behind the 2019 economic > Nobel prize winners Banerjee, Duflo and Kremer. Their approach to reduce > global poverty is experiment-based, taken from science. > > > > I quote from > https://www.forbes.com/sites/camilomaldonado/2019/10/14/nobel-prize-in-economics-won-by-trio-tackling-global-poverty/ > : > > "Their work, which tackles one of humanities most pressing issues, is > based on the idea that to battle poverty, the issues should be broken down > into smaller pieces and studied via small field experiments to answer > precise questions within the communities who are most affected." > > > > Another quote: > > "Poor people are supposed to be either completely desperate or lazy or > entrepreneurial but people don’t – we don’t try to … understand the deep > root and interconnected root of poverty." - Esther Duflo > > > > I don't mind if anybody wants to understand the deep root and > interconnected root of poverty, it's just that I personally, like Esther > Duflo, like to focus on what to do about it. > > > > Pieter > > > > On Fri, 27 Aug 2021 at 05:07, <thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Dave, > > > > This is, of course, exactly the opposite of my creation myth in which the > slate is wiped clean after every generation. But it would explain a belief > system in which well-being was the deserved reward of having lived well in > a previous life. > > > > While I am here, please let me point out that “equal in law” seems a > rather constrained understanding “born equal”, given especially that the > passage goes on to add equality in law (well rights, actually) as an > additional endowment. > > > > “… and they are endowed by their Creator by certain rights, including > life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. > > > > Where is John Dobson when we need him. Could somebody please forward this > note to him. I don’t have his email address here with me. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Nick > > Nick Thompson > > thompnicks...@gmail.com > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Prof David West > > *Sent:* Thursday, August 26, 2021 10:17 PM > > *To:* friam@redfish.com > > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] "All [persons] are created equal" > > > > Purely from my academic understanding of the subject; the Nick that is, at > this moment / in this incarnation, is a product of karma accrued and shed > over multiple instances of existence. Hence, what you are now is precisely > what you *deserve* to be. All persons may have been created equal some > untold incarnations ago and before they had any opportunity to accrete > karma. > > > > davew > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 26, 2021, at 2:04 PM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote: > > Sarbajit, > > > > If I understand the shape of the globe correctly, you are waking up pretty > soon, and I would like to pick up the conversation about caste, if you > don’t mind. > > > > I believe the proposition in the subject line. Given the many ways that > proposition can be understood as plainly false, I feel that my belief in it > must be defended. > > > > In what sense equal? Not in genes. Not in uterine environment. . Not in > early nutrition and cognitive stimulation. Not in social capitol. Not in > financial capitol. Not in access to health care. Not in exposure to > future parasites. Not in almost anything that I can think of. So, why is > the aphorism not just nonsense. > > > > I find, that if I examine my thinking in this matter, a very primitive > metaphysics about the moment of an individual’s creation. What follows is > flagrantly silly, but here it is. On my account, at the moment of birth a > soul is taken out of storage and assigned to a body. By “person” in the > aphorism, I mean the combination of a particular soul with the particular > body. These assignments are at random. So, for good or ill, no soul > deserves the body it gets. I cannot claim credit for my genes, my good > uterine environment, my social capitol, my financial capitol, my bad hip, > the draft deferment it provided, my getting a phd at absolute peak of > demand for phd’s, my good education, even my FRIAM membership. They are > all consequences of that initial, random assignment. Now YOU may credit > me in some ways, because knowing that all these advantages have been > assigned to me may make me useful or pleasing (or the opposite) in many > ways, and that may bring me the advantages of your association. But è I ç > do not èdeserveç those advantages. > > > > This odd metaphysics leads me to enormous gratitude for the life I have > been allowed to live and great sympathy for rigorous taxation of the > advantaged, so that so much a soul’s future is not determined by that > moment of assignment. > > > > I have no idea what happens to this primitive metaphysics if I try to > integrate it with my monism. The religious scholars among you might > recognize as some backass weird perversion of Calvinism. > > > > > > Nick Thompson > > thompnicks...@gmail.com > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > > > > > > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > > > > > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > -- Frank Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918 Research: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/