My Cato Essays

[George H. Smith]

The Sons of Liberty and Resistance to the Stamp Act, Part Two

George H. Smith turns his attention to events after the Boston riots. As violence spread throughout the colonies, America moved ever closer to revolution.

The L.org podcast of my Cato Essay #8 (Dec. 20, 2011) is now up.

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

Social Laws, Part 8

Smith explores the historical and theoretical roots of methodological individualism and subjectivism.

My Cato Essay #143 is now up.

Ghs

[Samson Corwell]

Social Laws, Part 8

Smith explores the historical and theoretical roots of methodological individualism and subjectivism.

My Cato Essay #143 is now up.

Ghs

I read the essay, but I'm not so sure that individualism was an important part of the Enlightenment. That never like that was something it ever touched upon.

[George H. Smith]

Social Laws, Part 8

Smith explores the historical and theoretical roots of methodological individualism and subjectivism.

My Cato Essay #143 is now up.

Ghs

I read the essay, but I'm not so sure that individualism was an important part of the Enlightenment. That never like that was something it ever touched upon.

Although I discussed methodological individualism specifically, other forms of individualism, such as moral and political, were very important aspects of the Enlightenment. Indeed, when 19th movements, such as Romanticism and conservatism, assailed the Enlightenment, they typically focused on individualism (in various forms) as one of its most objectionable features. Even earlier, Edmund Burke blamed the excesses of the French Revolution on Enlightenment individualism, as did his many followers throughout the 19th century.

It is a simple matter to list Enlightenment defenders of individualism, such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in America; Adam Smith, Joseph Priestley, and Richard Price in Britain, Kant (who stressed the moral autonomy of the individual) in Germany; Diderot and other philosophes in France;, and so forth. It would not be much of a stretch to describe the 18th Century as The Age of Individualism.

Ghs

[Samson Corwell]

Social Laws, Part 8

Smith explores the historical and theoretical roots of methodological individualism and subjectivism.

My Cato Essay #143 is now up.

Ghs

I read the essay, but I'm not so sure that individualism was an important part of the Enlightenment. That never like that was something it ever touched upon.

Although I discussed methodological individualism specifically, other forms of individualism, such as moral and political, were very important aspects of the Enlightenment. Indeed, when 19th movements, such as Romanticism and conservatism, assailed the Enlightenment, they typically focused on individualism (in various forms) as one of its most objectionable features. Even earlier, Edmund Burke blamed the excesses of the French Revolution on Enlightenment individualism, as did his many followers throughout the 19th century.

It is a simple matter to list Enlightenment defenders of individualism, such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in America; Adam Smith, Joseph Priestley, and Richard Price in Britain, Kant (who stressed the moral autonomy of the individual) in Germany; Diderot and other philosophes in France;, and so forth. It would not be much of a stretch to describe the 18th Century as The Age of Individualism.

Ghs

Huh. I suppose I've just never really heard the word use in the context of the Enlightenment much before. Guess libertarians just use the word more often than non-libertarians. Would you necessarily non-individualism implies collectivism? I wouldn't necessarily call, say, the monarchists and Catholic conservatives of the pre-Revolution days "collectivists", though I might have called them "traditionalists".

Was contract an important theme in the time of the Enlightenment? Aside from social contract theory, I mean. It seems to me that some people think it was, but it just never jumped out at me as something that was core to the movement. Nor would it seem to me that contract touches upon enough areas to be a fundamental issue given that business is only one domain of life.

[George H. Smith]

A Misunderstanding, the Townshend Act, and More Trouble in the American Colonies

George H. Smith uses some of the crucial events that led to the American Revolution as background to explain the theory of resistance and revolution that emerged.

The L.org podcast of my Cato Essay #9 (Dec. 29, 2011) is now up.

Ghs

[Brant Gaede]

OL has become a malestorm mailstorm male storm (damn, worthless, spell checker!) Maelstrom of genius and idiocy and here you are, George, on your peaceful island tossing our pearls getting no pork chops in return.

--Brant

[Samson Corwell]

Social Laws, Part 8

Smith explores the historical and theoretical roots of methodological individualism and subjectivism.

My Cato Essay #143 is now up.

Ghs

I read the essay, but I'm not so sure that individualism was an important part of the Enlightenment. That never like that was something it ever touched upon.

Although I discussed methodological individualism specifically, other forms of individualism, such as moral and political, were very important aspects of the Enlightenment. Indeed, when 19th movements, such as Romanticism and conservatism, assailed the Enlightenment, they typically focused on individualism (in various forms) as one of its most objectionable features. Even earlier, Edmund Burke blamed the excesses of the French Revolution on Enlightenment individualism, as did his many followers throughout the 19th century.

It is a simple matter to list Enlightenment defenders of individualism, such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in America; Adam Smith, Joseph Priestley, and Richard Price in Britain, Kant (who stressed the moral autonomy of the individual) in Germany; Diderot and other philosophes in France;, and so forth. It would not be much of a stretch to describe the 18th Century as The Age of Individualism.

Ghs

Another question on this: was a commerce a big theme for the old classical liberals like Kant and Madison? I ask this because the repeated focus by modern classical liberals on contracts seems to be a major difference between them and the older liberals. Another difference seems to be that today's classical liberals focus on the topic of property a hell of a lot more than the Enlightenment's liberals (the Englightenment focused on property but not to the extent libertarians do today).

[George H. Smith]

Social Laws, Part 9

Smith explores some features of social holism, as explained and defended by Emile Durkheim.

My Cato Essay #144 is now up.

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

The Boston Massacre

George H. Smith continues his look at the events leading up to the American Revolution by telling the story of the Boston Massacre.

The L.org podcast of my Cato Essay #10 is now up.

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

Committees of Correspondence and the Road to American Independence

The story of the American Revolution’s prelude continues with the emergence of Committees of Correspondence among the colonists.

The Libertarianism.org podcast of my Cato Essay #11 is now up.

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

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

[Samson Corwell]

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.

[Brant Gaede]

Samson,

Don't get too upset if George doesn't reply. He posts these essays on several venues so he may not see your question. Not to say he won't, however.

Occasionally he gets a conversation going on another OL thread and I suggest you jump in there instead of his essay thread. For over two years he's been knocking off an essay a week--now it must be getting close to three years. Never seen a damn thing like it.

Note I'm not trying to answer your question. You didn't ask me. You're treating the situation like a private conversation I'm not a part of. Or anybody else but you two. If I came up with something and others chimed in I'm sure he'd notice and start setting things straight.

--Brant

he's just trying to get it all out there before "my brain turns to mush"

click on his avatar go to his profile click on his "content" and find his other threads

[Samson Corwell]

Samson,

Don't get too upset if George doesn't reply. He posts these essays on several venues so he may not see your question. Not to say he won't, however.

Occasionally he gets a conversation going on another OL thread and I suggest you jump in there instead of his essay thread. For over two years he's been knocking off an essay a week--now it must be getting close to three years. Never seen a damn thing like it.

Note I'm not trying to answer your question. You didn't ask me. You're treating the situation like a private conversation I'm not a part of. Or anybody else but you two. If I came up with something and others chimed in I'm sure he'd notice and start setting things straight.

--Brant

he's just trying to get it all out there before "my brain turns to mush"

click on his avatar go to his profile click on his "content" and find his other threads

Thanks.

[George H. Smith]

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

[Samson Corwell]

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.

[Brant Gaede]

Then what is marriage?

--Brant

[Samson Corwell]

Then what is marriage?

--Brant

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

[Brant Gaede]

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

[George H. Smith]

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

[George H. Smith]

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

[George H. Smith]

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

[George H. Smith]

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

[George H. Smith]

Self-Interest and Social Order in Classical Liberalism: David Hume

Smith begins his discussion of David Hume’s moral and social philosophy.

My Cato Essay #148 is now up.

Ghs

Later edit: I see that my post lacks indentations for the block quotations, which may make it a bit confusing to follow. That glitch should be corrected soon.

Ghs