Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.5 12/10/84; site acf4.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!acf4!mms1646
From: mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: What is "capitalism"? (Explorations of "self-interest")
Message-ID: <2380033@acf4.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 16-Jun-85 16:23:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: acf4.2380033
Posted: Sun Jun 16 16:23:00 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 18-Jun-85 04:41:27 EDT
References: <298@spar.UUCP>
Organization: New York University
Lines: 60

/* acf4:net.politics.theory / mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) /  4:23 pm  Jun 16, 1985 */
>/* tonyw@ubvax.UUCP (Tony Wuersch) /  2:49 pm  Jun 10, 1985 */

In article <2380026@acf4.UUCP>, mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) writes:
> >/* baba@spar.UUCP (Baba ROM DOS) /  4:00 pm  Jun  4, 1985 */
> 
> >By the same logic, how can everyone know what's best for *themselves*?
> 
> Because each person CAN know what he really wants, even tho he MAY
> not know.  Others can never KNOW what another wants, except if he/she
> communicates this to them.
> 
> Of course, it is arrogant and presumptuous to say "I know what's best
> for you," (except of course when dealing with your own young child),
> as well as a manifestation of a nauseating personal quality.
> 
> 						Mike Sykora

>Each person may know or may not know.  Others may know or may not know.
>Others know to the extent that a person communicates to them.  A person knows
>to the extent that he/she communicates to him/herself.

But on waht basis can a person make the decision, Y knows better than I
what is best for me?

>And why the
>implication that the knowledge we have of others should be wiped out
>in political ethics or policy?

I don't see such an implication.  Please elaborate.

>What does "arrogance and presumption" have to do with TRUTH?  Certainly
>people who don't know others and make critical suggestions are arrogant by
>assumption, because they're too uninformed to hit the mark enough.  They
>arrogate knowledge to themselves which they don't have.

This type of behavior is arrogant and presumptuous as opposed to saying
something on the order of "I think that it would be best for you to
do the following, because . . ."  Otherwise, the implication is that
the one you are attempting to help is incapable of making decisions on
such matters, but you are capable.

>But people who do know others and criticize based on that knowledge often
>do others a service.  And if they are wrong, they get feedback to that
>effect and learn thereby.

Agreed.  Note, that in such a case, the advisee is free to ignore the advice.

>How the obtaining and communicating of information about the world, which
>includes what people are thinking about you and what you are thinking about
>others, could be labeled as a "nauseating personal quality" is beyond me.
>Maybe Mike only knows people who abuse the practice.

Perhaps I implied this, but I did not mean to.  What I meant is that the
presentation of such advice in a condescending way, as I described above,
is a manifestation of a nauseating personal quality.

>Tony Wuersch

						Mike Sykora