06-23-2010, 06:31 PM
Hi,
Yes. And in principle, I agree with you. But I didn't ask you whether it was 'correct' behavior. I asked you if it was behavior you thought was reasonably possible to expect from the majority of the population.
That is what I mean by "the art of the possible". Is the average person capable of knowing, understanding, and doing what is right? Or does he need guidance, perhaps even force, to do right? It's still the old Jefferson-Hamilton argument. I wish that Jefferson had been right, but history falls squarely on Hamilton's side. Indeed, even Jefferson fell on Hamilton's side when it suited him.
I cannot embrace an economic or social structure that is based on what I consider an incorrect assessment of human nature.
As to the rest, there are two questions that need to be considered independently. The first is whether we have a good form of government. If we do, we should try to preserve it and improve it. If we don't, we should replace it with whatever is better. And if we don't, the second question is moot.
The second question, if our government is of a good form, is it working as it should. I think you mix those two questions.
Finally, I have to ask; if the United States started out with a (relatively) good government, and if that government has become worse, doesn't that imply that the people of the United States have failed in their limited responsibility of electing their representatives? If they are not competent to practice their limited responsibility, how do you conclude that they should be given more?
--Pete
(06-23-2010, 04:07 PM)kandrathe Wrote: I do believe that the true "correct" position is for people to attempt to take care of themselves wherever possible, and if altruistic people want to step in to help those who cannot help themselves, that is their choice (one I wholeheartedly support).
Yes. And in principle, I agree with you. But I didn't ask you whether it was 'correct' behavior. I asked you if it was behavior you thought was reasonably possible to expect from the majority of the population.
That is what I mean by "the art of the possible". Is the average person capable of knowing, understanding, and doing what is right? Or does he need guidance, perhaps even force, to do right? It's still the old Jefferson-Hamilton argument. I wish that Jefferson had been right, but history falls squarely on Hamilton's side. Indeed, even Jefferson fell on Hamilton's side when it suited him.
I cannot embrace an economic or social structure that is based on what I consider an incorrect assessment of human nature.
As to the rest, there are two questions that need to be considered independently. The first is whether we have a good form of government. If we do, we should try to preserve it and improve it. If we don't, we should replace it with whatever is better. And if we don't, the second question is moot.
The second question, if our government is of a good form, is it working as it should. I think you mix those two questions.
Finally, I have to ask; if the United States started out with a (relatively) good government, and if that government has become worse, doesn't that imply that the people of the United States have failed in their limited responsibility of electing their representatives? If they are not competent to practice their limited responsibility, how do you conclude that they should be given more?
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?