williams@kirk.DEC (John Williams 223-3402) (08/27/85)
Morality. Morality sets up the rules by which the game of evolution is played. Morality is the criteria for artificial selection. A beneficial morality makes a successful transposition towards a less critical set of criteria. For a civilization to be graced by culture, there must be room for individuals to learn from mistakes. This places emphasis on rehabilitation rather than punishment as example. It also places high rewards for specialization. Rich, Minimal restriction is the basis of Capitalism. As an approach, or a paradigm, if you prefer, it tends to fill in the holes in the legislation with exploitation and speculation. Communism offers less motivation. The soviet government is more advanced than the american government with one particularly striking exception, that is that they are trying to regulate industries they do not properly understand. A compromise might be that new technologies would start out in a capitalist environment, and be phased into regulation as more became known and definable. This is basically what happens, anyway. Ideal Communism is a sinking economy. Ideal Capitalism is much better, it crashes first. One of the most important features of any morality or government is that it stabilizes the environment. It provides the individual with a " Safe Operating Margin ". One of the dangers is that it might overstabilize the environment, stability being temporary, ( ask any economics major ) and cause the society to be unable to adapt to catastrophy, when and if that occurs. Most importantly, Beneficial is heavily dependent on human nature. I think that if you think about it long enough, freedom, as described as something to be used as a criteria for evaluating different morality systems, is a compromise. And furthermore, in a stable environment that tends towards specialization, the general populace is unable to place where the agreement should be. These compromises are performed and negotiated by ( trusted ) specialists. It's beginning to sound alot like what the US and the USSR have in common. I know there's at least one of you out there who is a firm capitalist. Here's your chance. Let me warn you however, what you confuse for clear thinking may cause the negotiations to last forever, and for nothing to get resolved. Oh, and, Rich. About this morality system. I don't believe it's that simple. Mutually assured minimal interference equates in my book to isolationism, the exact same policy this country had in the 20's before the crash. I think what you may mean is the ways in which you are allowed to interfere. A morality system should successfully transpose this interference into less critical measures, not to eliminate it. Non interference translates into a savage utopia, where we can effectively kill our own planet. John. Williams' first law of resolution: There will never be an end to your problems.
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (08/29/85)
> Rich, Minimal restriction is the basis of Capitalism. As > an approach, or a paradigm, if you prefer, it tends to fill in > the holes in the legislation with exploitation and speculation. > Communism offers less motivation. [WILLIAMS] Capitalism is but one attempt at an implementation of this based on certain preconceptions of what amounts to interference and leaving it at that. It is not as black and white as you would picture it. -- "I was walking down the street. A man came up to me and asked me what was the capital of Bolivia. I hesitated. Three sailors jumped me. The next thing I knew I was making chicken salad." "I don't believe that for a minute. Everyone knows the capital of Bolivia is La Paz." Rich Rosen pyuxd!rlr