- 04 Mar 2011 16:17
#13646089
Daktoria,
I'm afraid I couldn't understand your post, though I would love to respond to it once I do.
Obversity,
I think you make a good point regarding act- vs. rule-consequentialism. A Hayekian perspective would contribute to the discussion. Hayek was very sceptical of the ability of central planners to possess sufficient local knowledge with which to make good decision regarding the economy as a whole. Randy Barnett (in "The Structure of Liberty") develops the Hayekian "Knowledge Problem" into a full-fledged basis for a rule-consequentialist support for libertarian private property rights.
Essentially, the idea is that, as a matter of rule (to which there may be exception in "life boat", emergency situations), respect for private property rights will allow society to best utilise personal and local knowledge regarding the proper use of resources. Barnett goes beyond the Knowledge Problem to also discuss problems of Interest (partiality, incentive and compliance) and Power (e.g. enforcement abuse) to back up his approach.
More generally, I would argue that people routinely overestimate their ability to judge the consequences of a particular act, and underestimate the complexity of the social system. That observation acts as an overall weight towards relying on general rules as opposed to detailed judgement of specific acts to achieve broadly desired consequences.
I'm afraid I couldn't understand your post, though I would love to respond to it once I do.
Obversity,
I think you make a good point regarding act- vs. rule-consequentialism. A Hayekian perspective would contribute to the discussion. Hayek was very sceptical of the ability of central planners to possess sufficient local knowledge with which to make good decision regarding the economy as a whole. Randy Barnett (in "The Structure of Liberty") develops the Hayekian "Knowledge Problem" into a full-fledged basis for a rule-consequentialist support for libertarian private property rights.
Essentially, the idea is that, as a matter of rule (to which there may be exception in "life boat", emergency situations), respect for private property rights will allow society to best utilise personal and local knowledge regarding the proper use of resources. Barnett goes beyond the Knowledge Problem to also discuss problems of Interest (partiality, incentive and compliance) and Power (e.g. enforcement abuse) to back up his approach.
More generally, I would argue that people routinely overestimate their ability to judge the consequences of a particular act, and underestimate the complexity of the social system. That observation acts as an overall weight towards relying on general rules as opposed to detailed judgement of specific acts to achieve broadly desired consequences.
Free men are not equal and equal men are not free.
Government is not the solution. Government is the problem.
Government is not the solution. Government is the problem.