What are people talking about when they talk about "classical liberalism"?
A thread on what classical liberalism is—and liberal science is—and why these ideas are important 👇
A thread on what classical liberalism is—and liberal science is—and why these ideas are important 👇
By using the term "liberalism", we aren't referring to "the left" as used in the US. Nor are we referring to
"the right" as used in Australia
Universal Liberalism is a philosophical & ethical position which focuses on individuality, liberty, and equality under law for everyone.
"the right" as used in Australia
Universal Liberalism is a philosophical & ethical position which focuses on individuality, liberty, and equality under law for everyone.
The great problem in society is how you deal with conflict.
We use markets to determine who has economic resources.
We use democracy to determine who has political power.
And we use science to determine who has truth.
We use markets to determine who has economic resources.
We use democracy to determine who has political power.
And we use science to determine who has truth.
"A market game is an open-ended, decentralized process for allocating resources & legitimizing possession.
A democracy game is an open-ended, decentralized process for legitimizing the use of force.
A science game is an open-ended, decentralized process for legitimizing belief"
A democracy game is an open-ended, decentralized process for legitimizing the use of force.
A science game is an open-ended, decentralized process for legitimizing belief"
"In biological evolution, no species is spared the rigors of competition—nor are the participants in capitalism, democracy, science.
No matter who you are, you must conduct your business in the currency of dollars, votes, or criticism—no special fiat, no personal authority."
No matter who you are, you must conduct your business in the currency of dollars, votes, or criticism—no special fiat, no personal authority."
"Much as creatures compete for food, so entrepreneurs compete for business, candidates for votes, & hypotheses for supporters.
As in biological evolution, no outcome is fixed or final—nor is it in liberalism.
There is always another trade, another election, another hypothesis."
As in biological evolution, no outcome is fixed or final—nor is it in liberalism.
There is always another trade, another election, another hypothesis."
Objections to liberalism:
The Fundamentalist Principle: Those who know the truth should decide who's right.
The Egalitarian Principle: All persons’ beliefs have equal claims to respect.
The Humanitarian Principle: The first priority is "cause no harm."
The Fundamentalist Principle: Those who know the truth should decide who's right.
The Egalitarian Principle: All persons’ beliefs have equal claims to respect.
The Humanitarian Principle: The first priority is "cause no harm."
Fundamentalists say that science is wrong.
Egalitarians say that we are prioritizing science over other ways of knowing.
Humanitarians say that certain speech is hurtful.
Liberals say that subjecting ideas to public criticism is the only legitimate way to decide who is right
Egalitarians say that we are prioritizing science over other ways of knowing.
Humanitarians say that certain speech is hurtful.
Liberals say that subjecting ideas to public criticism is the only legitimate way to decide who is right
Fundamentalism is totalitarian (Do what I want b/c I say so).
Epistemological egalitarianism justifies arguments like "creationism=evolution"
Humanitarianism sacrifice society for an individual (e.g gay marriage took forever b/c ppl were offended by it)
Epistemological egalitarianism justifies arguments like "creationism=evolution"
Humanitarianism sacrifice society for an individual (e.g gay marriage took forever b/c ppl were offended by it)
"Under liberalism, you can do anything you wish to test a statement, as long as you follow the rules:
1- The system may not fix the outcome in advance or for good (no final say).
2- The system may not distinguish between participants (no personal authority)."
1- The system may not fix the outcome in advance or for good (no final say).
2- The system may not distinguish between participants (no personal authority)."
Those who worry about the death of liberalism worry that
the old principle of the Inquisition is being revived: ppl who hold harmful opinions should be punished for the good of society
They worry that if speech is considered violence, so will science/math
the old principle of the Inquisition is being revived: ppl who hold harmful opinions should be punished for the good of society
They worry that if speech is considered violence, so will science/math
They also worry about epistemological relativism
Liberal science insists on freedom of belief&speech, but not freedom of knowledge
E.g Christian Scientists who unsuccessfully treat their sick children with prayer are charged w/ manslaughter, while parents who try surgery aren't
Liberal science insists on freedom of belief&speech, but not freedom of knowledge
E.g Christian Scientists who unsuccessfully treat their sick children with prayer are charged w/ manslaughter, while parents who try surgery aren't
Liberal science is egalitarian.
It's true that some ppl have been systematically denied access, but that represents not the failure of liberalism but the failure to embrace it.
Shunning science for being used incorrectly is like shunning democracy b/c certain ppl couldn’t vote.
It's true that some ppl have been systematically denied access, but that represents not the failure of liberalism but the failure to embrace it.
Shunning science for being used incorrectly is like shunning democracy b/c certain ppl couldn’t vote.
The reason liberal science is important is not because we're all liberal, tolerant people at heart—most of us aren't.
In fact, we're all mostly fundamentalists at heart. We think we're right.
Liberalism protect us from our totalitarian instincts —to demand people agree with us.
In fact, we're all mostly fundamentalists at heart. We think we're right.
Liberalism protect us from our totalitarian instincts —to demand people agree with us.
Much of this summarized from (or quoting directly) Jonathan Rauch's "Kindly Inquisitors" amazon.com/Kindly-Inquisi…
Related thread on free speech:
Related thread on free speech:
