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is no longer valid for its own field.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