tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post3288263708470904566..comments2024-03-28T15:24:53.579-04:00Comments on Rational Nation USA: Advocates Of Capitalism and Rational Self Interest... Smith and RandLes Carpenterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01120280762698472496noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-90593030026198916502011-08-28T00:44:22.575-04:002011-08-28T00:44:22.575-04:00It requires a understanding of "rational"...It requires a understanding of "rational". IE: devoid of feeling. Based solely on logic, reason and an understanding of reality as it is perceived by the rational and logical mind wth reality as it is, not what ones feelings wish it to be.Les Carpenterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01120280762698472496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-15441224069547484572011-08-28T00:33:58.989-04:002011-08-28T00:33:58.989-04:00Okay. We disagree on human nature.
But how are y...Okay. We disagree on human nature.<br /><br />But how are you differentiating Smith's definition of rational self interest to Rand?<br /><br />Smith believed in the power of the Christian spirit to regulate markets. Objectivists believe it is rational self interest. Realists realize in real life not Smith nor Rand are useful to many aspects of modern real life.<br /><br />JMJJersey McJoneshttp://jerseymcjones.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-70780509651104226222011-08-28T00:20:59.907-04:002011-08-28T00:20:59.907-04:00Rand took the "invisible hand" out of th...Rand took the "invisible hand" out of the equation. How about we start there?<br /><br />Your belief that "rational self interest" is irrational is in fact irrational in its premise.<br /><br />Shall,we start from there?Les Carpenterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01120280762698472496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-14302914327427958632011-08-27T22:40:45.103-04:002011-08-27T22:40:45.103-04:00"Adam Smith has been caricatured by some as e..."Adam Smith has been caricatured by some as endorsing greed, much as his modern counterpart Ayn Rand has been by today's political left."<br /><br />Les,<br /><br />I know Rand and Smith have been portrayed that way, but most modern liberals know better than that.<br /><br />We understand Smith and Rand just as validly as you. You do not personally own the one universal understanding of Smith and Rand.<br /><br />We can at least argue within that condition, yes?<br /><br />I do not believe Smith or Rand are simply malevolent advocates of greed.<br /><br />Most liberals agree with me.<br /><br />We have reasonable arguments with Rand's hypotheses - like "rational self-interest." I can think of at least three things wrong with just those three words!<br /><br />Objectifying that which is in all essense subjective is insanity.<br /><br />I do not nor ever have thought Rand was just a popular sycophant of the rich.<br /><br />I figure she was nuts.<br /><br />Certainly interesting - an important 20th century figure, for Atlas' sake! ;)<br /><br />But the pillars of her philosophy, the notion that you can even identify, let alone balance without acting, "interest" and "rationality" of the "self" which is by definition doomed to the natural evolution of "irrationality" could only produce an illusion - not a real condition.<br /><br />Rand did not view the world in a rational or realistic way. She always reminded me of Metternich, just born in the wrong time even more than him. <br /><br />Smith is another matter entirely. And yes, he is widely misunderstood - on BOTH the left and right and you know it (it seems to me almost as many people <em>like</em> the notion that Smith "justifies" greed as think he does in the first place).<br /><br />I think his educated readers (including we people who appreciate him without suggesting we should directly convert to 18th century economic theories), should discuss his thoughts more often.<br /><br />I think Smith would have more in common with me than you think if we really hammered down teh particulars.<br /><br />I would love to debate about Smith.<br /><br />For instance...<br /><br />Smith was religious. The "invisible hand" was actually quite visible to him, in his mind. This is a foundation of his argument. <br /><br />Wanna start there?<br /><br />I'm not religious, and neither are you.<br /><br />How about we take that theory from there? ;)<br /><br />JMJJersey McJoneshttp://jerseymcjones.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-52499969240319946362011-08-27T14:14:25.444-04:002011-08-27T14:14:25.444-04:00Great post, RN.
I'm doing a takeoff on Ration...Great post, RN.<br /><br />I'm doing a takeoff on Rational Self Interest tomorrow...<br /><br />Adam Smith also wrote works on morals, which he believed were essential for a functional free market.<br /><br />Gene: The rich will always have more power. The great leveler is the vote. Each person gets one, no matter how rich or how poor.<br /><br />I think a restoration of the rule of law would go a long way towards righting the ship. Our government is pay for play, and that is the problem, not that some are richer than others.Silverfiddlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13541652236676260219noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8549971354391868786.post-41196575079132182812011-08-27T13:24:00.428-04:002011-08-27T13:24:00.428-04:00Les, the major problem I have is that the Governme...Les, the major problem I have is that the Government, electoral system and Capitalist system we have today is the one the so-called Capitalists want! Poor people have no political power. Money runs our system, so how do the poor influence it?<br /><br />Major policy decisions and legislature is crafted by and for the Richest of the Rich.Grung_e_Genehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01894879088472559055noreply@blogger.com