Jump to content






Photo
- - - - -

My Cato Essays


  • Please log in to reply
348 replies to this topic

#341 George H. Smith

George H. Smith

    $$$$$$

  • VIP
  • 5,710 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bloomington, IL
  • Interests:Books, ideas, jazz, chess, and intelligent people

Posted 11 October 2014 - 04:32 PM

Social Laws, Part 10

Smith explores Emile Durkheim’s major objections to Herbert Spencer’s theory of a free society based on voluntary contracts.

My Cato Essay #145 is now up.

Ghs


George, is there any particular reason for why contracts are so important? When I go through libertarian literature, I get a fill of writing that treats contracts as if they fit into every aspect of human life. I mean, when I think of freedom and liberty and all that jazz...a commercial tool is not what I imagine.


In the classical liberal tradition, contracts were viewed as far more than a "commercial tool." As I explain in the current essay, "contract" was used as a generic term that covered voluntary agreements of all sorts, whether informal or formal. When Lockeans spoke of a "social contract," for example, they didn't mean that a people had entered into formal contractual agreement with a ruler. Rather, the point was that voluntary consent was required for a legitimate government. That consent might be "tacit," however, and such variations generated an extensive literature on the meaning of "consent" and "contract."

In short, if we advocate a free society, we are advocating a society based on voluntary consent, and that demands that we understand the nature of noncoercive agreements, or "contracts." The matter can get quite complicated.

Ghs

#342 Samson Corwell

Samson Corwell

    $$$$$

  • Members
  • 556 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:science, government, (geo)politics

Posted 11 October 2014 - 05:40 PM

Social Laws, Part 10

Smith explores Emile Durkheim’s major objections to Herbert Spencer’s theory of a free society based on voluntary contracts.

My Cato Essay #145 is now up.

Ghs


George, is there any particular reason for why contracts are so important? When I go through libertarian literature, I get a fill of writing that treats contracts as if they fit into every aspect of human life. I mean, when I think of freedom and liberty and all that jazz...a commercial tool is not what I imagine.


In the classical liberal tradition, contracts were viewed as far more than a "commercial tool." As I explain in the current essay, "contract" was used as a generic term that covered voluntary agreements of all sorts, whether informal or formal. When Lockeans spoke of a "social contract," for example, they didn't mean that a people had entered into formal contractual agreement with a ruler. Rather, the point was that voluntary consent was required for a legitimate government. That consent might be "tacit," however, and such variations generated an extensive literature on the meaning of "consent" and "contract."

In short, if we advocate a free society, we are advocating a society based on voluntary consent, and that demands that we understand the nature of noncoercive agreements, or "contracts." The matter can get quite complicated.

Ghs


Aye. I think the problem though is that with contracts you've got a problem when someone changes their mind later on, at which point it ceases to be "voluntary". Another problem, I think, is the fact that there are multiple perspectives on what counts as forcing someone to do something. I, for example, have advocated laws barring employers from requiring that employees proffer their passwords for social networks. It always seemed to me that it was the case that the employers were doing coercing. A third problem is the distribution of wealth or property, the rules for which are not voluntary. It was because of this that I gave up on political contractarianism and embraced more Burkean views on government. None of the stuff about holism or individualism factors into it, though.

ETA: I've always been fond of the idea of consent. But it gets tricky when talking about what consent should be required for. Should consent apply to using others inventions? How about their faces or likenesses? I'm a big advocate of privacy and I wrote a bill in model legislature that would've made it illegal to take pictures of people in certain settings without their consent. See also personality rights.

I've also bristled with libertarians over what constitutes a contract. Marriage, for instance, is one thing I've been telling them isn't a contract. Sales are another, though I might be wrong.

Freedom to Tinker | Privacy Rights | Gratis versus Libre


#343 Brant Gaede

Brant Gaede

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 16,031 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tucson, AZ
  • Interests:All kinds of stuff

Posted 11 October 2014 - 06:26 PM

Then what is marriage?

 

--Brant


Rational Individualist, Rational self-interest, Individual Rights--limited government libertarian heavily influenced by Objectivism


#344 Samson Corwell

Samson Corwell

    $$$$$

  • Members
  • 556 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:science, government, (geo)politics

Posted 11 October 2014 - 11:23 PM

Then what is marriage?
 
--Brant


Sui generis. It's certainly not replaceable with contracts.

Freedom to Tinker | Privacy Rights | Gratis versus Libre


#345 Brant Gaede

Brant Gaede

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 16,031 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tucson, AZ
  • Interests:All kinds of stuff

Posted 11 October 2014 - 11:51 PM

Then what is marriage?
 
--Brant


Sui generis. It's certainly not replaceable with contracts.

 

If that's not begging the question it doesn't answer the question for sui generis is empty as such.

 

--Brant


Rational Individualist, Rational self-interest, Individual Rights--limited government libertarian heavily influenced by Objectivism


#346 George H. Smith

George H. Smith

    $$$$$$

  • VIP
  • 5,710 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bloomington, IL
  • Interests:Books, ideas, jazz, chess, and intelligent people

Posted 15 October 2014 - 01:49 PM

The Boston Tea Party

The British response to the Boston Tea Party stiffened American resolve for revolution. George Smith tells the story of that event.

The Libertarianism.org podcast of my Cato Essay #12 is now available.

Ghs

#347 George H. Smith

George H. Smith

    $$$$$$

  • VIP
  • 5,710 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bloomington, IL
  • Interests:Books, ideas, jazz, chess, and intelligent people

Posted 17 October 2014 - 12:13 PM


Self-Interest and Social Order in Classical Liberalism: Shaftesbury

Smith begins his exploration of self-interest and social order by explaining Shaftesbury’s theory of social psychology.

My Cato Essay #146 is now up.

Ghs

#348 George H. Smith

George H. Smith

    $$$$$$

  • VIP
  • 5,710 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bloomington, IL
  • Interests:Books, ideas, jazz, chess, and intelligent people

Posted 22 October 2014 - 03:10 PM

The Coercive Acts and Their Theoretical Significance

The Coercive Acts—the British response to the Boston Tea Party—was the true catalyst that led to the American Revolution.

The Libertarianism.org podcast of my Cato Essay #13 is now available.

Ghs

#349 George H. Smith

George H. Smith

    $$$$$$

  • VIP
  • 5,710 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bloomington, IL
  • Interests:Books, ideas, jazz, chess, and intelligent people

Posted Today, 12:42 PM


Self-Interest and Social Order in Classical Liberalism: Political Philosophy and Justice

Smith explores two concepts of political philosophy and their respective ideas about justice and a good society.

My Cato Essay #147 is now up.

Ghs




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users