Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!genrad!decvax!harpo!eagle!mhuxt!mhuxi!mhuxa!houxm!hocda!spanky!burl!we13!ihnp4!ixn5c!inuxc!pur-ee!iuvax!isrnix!tim From: tim@isrnix.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Limited Laws for All Time? Message-ID: <254@isrnix.UUCP> Date: Tue, 28-Jun-83 12:34:18 EDT Article-I.D.: isrnix.254 Posted: Tue Jun 28 12:34:18 1983 Date-Received: Wed, 29-Jun-83 09:56:18 EDT Lines: 24 the idea that one could have a strictly delimited set of laws to be operational for all eternity as Tom Craver suggests utilizes a model that is no longer valid for its own field. That model is logic or a complete logical system similar to the one developed by Russell and Whitehead in "Principia Mathematica". Wittgenstein made some very interesting attacks on this model but the final blow was Godel's theorem-his proof that no logical system could be self-contained and totally consistent. If such is true for LOGICAL systems how can it possibly be true for POLITICAL systems or moral systems? I would suggest that Tom Craver get his head out of Ayn Rand (seemingly his only reading source) and read Michael Polanyi's "Personal Knowledge" or Hofstadter's "Godel,Escher, Bach" for an explication of Godel's theorem and possible implications. Morality (which is what the best politics should be) is not something which can be frozen at one point in time but must develop just as dynamically as science, technology, and all other human endeavors. But it is typical for Conservatives to try to freeze morality at an anachronistic level which fails to match current conditions. At one time it was "moral" for humans to reproduce as often as possible for example if we wished to propagate the species. But now when overpopulations threatens the worldwide ecological balance and thousands of other animals and plants it is "moral" to try to stabilize or, if possible, reduce the human population. Tim Sevener decvax!pur-ee!iuvax!isrnix!tim