tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post5373163687795502604..comments2024-03-23T12:05:13.464-07:00Comments on Ideas: Jennifer Roback Morse: Defending Marriage, Misrepresenting Smith?David Friedmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06543763515095867595noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-22399331211838258092014-10-27T13:35:38.429-07:002014-10-27T13:35:38.429-07:00I could be wrong on Dr. Morse's use of the quo...I could be wrong on Dr. Morse's use of the quote, but I think she was meaning that it is natural for businesses of the same trade to meet and perhaps plot to raise prices but the government should not encourage this assembly even if it has no power to prevent either by law or without limiting liberty.<br /><br />The reason I say this is because she makes reference to the "noncouple" in the prior paragraph and makes the analogy from Smith's quote. Just because a couple can meet freely does not mean the government should encourage such behavior by enshrining their ideas to the state much the way Smith said that people of the same trade may meet to discuss raising prices. "But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies, much less to render them necessary." Smith, same paragraphJared Q. Tomanekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15072606799705447309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-36440619890659220422010-07-01T17:57:01.118-07:002010-07-01T17:57:01.118-07:00Ah, there's *another* reason for properly attr...Ah, there's *another* reason for properly attributing ideas....albatrossnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-4778519914082971892010-06-26T22:48:53.027-07:002010-06-26T22:48:53.027-07:00Anonymous writes:
"David, you are not even w...Anonymous writes:<br /><br />"David, you are not even wrong - you are just spouting gibberish."<br /><br />Shouldn't you be addressing that to Adam Smith, not to me?David Friedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06543763515095867595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-71147935315106847872010-06-26T20:54:02.345-07:002010-06-26T20:54:02.345-07:00> A regulation which obliges all those of the ...> A regulation which obliges all those of the same trade in a particular town to enter their names and places of abode in a public register, facilitates such assemblies.<br /><br />Uh, yeah, why would we want to have for example a registry of physicians? Any consumer could examine the nameplates on all graveyards in vicinity and figure out which physicians were responsible for more deaths - and than discover statistics for different medical occupations and correct for those. David, you are not even wrong - you are just spouting gibberish.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-49829896764149103422010-06-25T00:05:24.050-07:002010-06-25T00:05:24.050-07:00It is sadly rare that people who complain about fl...It is sadly rare that people who complain about flaws in society have solutions which address the basic problems of collective action. For example, giving negative social feedback to people who don't treat marriage with respect seems like a classic tragedy of the commons to me - you get all the concentrated negative effects of pissing people off, while the positive societal effects are dispersed.<br /><br />Economists really need to learn public choice theory. Few seem to know it, and it's just sad.Patri Friedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00795471439484698201noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-10974937707611027512010-06-24T10:39:17.196-07:002010-06-24T10:39:17.196-07:00Besides ddfr's point, it can be significant th...Besides ddfr's point, it can be significant that an idea or argument was already well-known at a particular date.<br /><br />E.g., showing that some public-choice-ish consideration showed up in the Federalist Papers doesn't necessarily mean that we should honor the distinguished authors by agreeing with them. But it does mean that a scholar or community of scholars who pointedly ignored such considerations at some later date can reasonably be suspected of doing it on purpose.William Newmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14336821309402794016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-80058190483807684722010-06-22T22:17:04.301-07:002010-06-22T22:17:04.301-07:00To answer Kid:
None of us has the time or experti...To answer Kid:<br /><br />None of us has the time or expertise to form independent opinions on all things we care about. Frequently the best we can do is to find someone whose judgment and knowledge we trust and rely on his opinion. To take a trivial example, I am confident that antarctica and Siberia exist, although I have never directly observed either.<br /><br />The need to get some information indirectly is relevant in two ways to this particular post. On the one hand, if Smith really had come out in favor of antitrust laws, that would be a reason for people who share Smith's general views and have a high opinion of his ability to revise upward their estimate that such laws are a good thing.<br /><br />On the other hand, if Jennifer Morse badly misrepresents facts she ought to be familiar with—in this case by an out of context quote that stops just before the sentence that shows that the claim she is making about Smith is false–that is a reason to discount what she says on other subjects. It isn't a reason to ignore good arguments if she makes them, but it should make you less inclined to think that if she holds a view there are probably good arguments for it.David Friedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06543763515095867595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-58122726200994108952010-06-22T18:57:44.753-07:002010-06-22T18:57:44.753-07:00Anonymous Kid said...
> I have a question for ...Anonymous Kid said...<br />> I have a question for David. Why is it, in the quest for truth, so important who said something or what somebody said? Should not all propositions be judged on their own merit, rather than by their author?<br /><br />Let me offer an answer. You are correct, all propositions could be judged on their own merit, but who has the time to judge all propositions? Reputation provides a shortcut to separate the propositions that are likely to be valuable, from the ones which are less likely to be valuable. This has both merits and demerits, but, for me, if Adam Smith said it, it is worth listening too, if Alex Smith, the crazy homeless guy said it, well not so much.<br /><br />Of course, who knows what I might be missing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-6276790859729987012010-06-22T15:44:05.887-07:002010-06-22T15:44:05.887-07:00I took a graduate 'Competition Policy' cou...I took a graduate 'Competition Policy' course where the Prof used the same (half) quote to argue for the legitemacy of anti-trust laws. When I pointed out the next sentence from Smith, he said he had never heard of it.<br /><br />PedroAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-925493582513571212010-06-22T14:59:00.012-07:002010-06-22T14:59:00.012-07:00Kid, I have no idea why you thought that 'junk...Kid, I have no idea why you thought that 'junk e-mail' would mean comments from the audience.<br /><br />It means, of course, dodgy commercial propositions e-mailed to millions of people whose addresses have been harvested from the Web by programs designed to do that job.Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15661031964537092605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-3902105630585050602010-06-22T12:09:29.834-07:002010-06-22T12:09:29.834-07:00"Kid" is basically asking about the appe..."Kid" is basically asking about the appeal to authority:<br /><br />www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html<br /><br />Speaking strictly in terms of logical and factual correctness, it is a fallacy. But in the realm of rhetoric and persuasion, it is so powerful that appeals even to irrelevant authorities, e.g. movie stars, carry a great deal of weight, which is one of the great tragedies of human culture IMO.Alexnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-39993915472910902002010-06-22T08:51:40.002-07:002010-06-22T08:51:40.002-07:00Marriage already confers more than 1000 distinct b...Marriage already confers more than 1000 distinct benefits not available to single folks. The clear libertarian position would be to eliminate those privileges rather than increase their number.<br /><br />I think Kid's question about the value of citing a famous person in support of one's argument is interesting. I have long noted that physicists and mathematicians, among others, do not waste their time citing other authorities as evidence of the truth or value of their discovery or proof. Nor do they seek the acclaim of colleagues or the public.<br /><br />On the other hand, professors, lawyers, philosophers and theologians seem to be so insecure in their knowledge that the depend on authorities for evidence and on their colleagues for acclaim. I imagine the reason for that is that there is no truth value to what they have to offer that self-evidently proves the value of their offering. What is more important to them is that, like Willy Loman, they are respected up and down the coast.<br /><br />Religion and law are special cases, since there is no objective truth involved in any of it. But even Greg Mankiw wastes a lot of time worrying about how frequently he is cited by his peers.jimbinohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03416364723697446318noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-17306547429665083462010-06-22T08:06:58.427-07:002010-06-22T08:06:58.427-07:00It's consistently disappointing to see liberta...It's consistently disappointing to see libertarians --real or imagined-- argue against equal and expanded civil rights in defense of their own narrow view of what is "better" for everyone else. Opposition to recognition of same sex unions is contrary to libertarian principles and the inclusion of social conservatives and the religious right into the libertarian fold make me lean the other way.chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02648801306722540550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-2366992489975088472010-06-22T07:11:15.430-07:002010-06-22T07:11:15.430-07:00Sorry, that's Acton, not action.Sorry, that's Acton, not action.Augusthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08758314961163692341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-90307366082795885052010-06-22T07:10:24.956-07:002010-06-22T07:10:24.956-07:00I don't know if they are still available, but ...I don't know if they are still available, but she did some talks for the Action Institute a few years ago. She does make really good arguments, but seems to be more conservative than libertarian- at least in the sense that, ultimately, she wants to use the force of the state to solve the problem. <br /><br />I think she, and many people like her, would become more libertarian if they understood that through a combination of property rights and the freedom of association they could set up a private jurisdiction. This would lead to differentiation among neighborhoods and the value of what Morse is suggesting would become more obvious.Augusthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08758314961163692341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-12202253632035717062010-06-22T01:22:18.042-07:002010-06-22T01:22:18.042-07:00If by "junk e-mail" you mean comments fr...If by "junk e-mail" you mean comments from the audience, then attracting it is precisely the point of publishing your email address.<br /><br />I have a question for David. Why is it, in the quest for truth, so important who said something or what somebody said? Should not all propositions be judged on their own merit, rather than by their author?Kidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19727420.post-74877954513493050942010-06-22T01:00:07.686-07:002010-06-22T01:00:07.686-07:00Unfortunately, sensible people are now very wary o...Unfortunately, sensible people are now very wary of publishing their e-mail addresses, because to do so (especially in clear text on the Web) will surely attract junk e-mail.<br /><br />Junk e-mail is an epidemic to which some cure is needed, but apparently those who could implement a cure haven't decided amongst themselves how to go about it.Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15661031964537092605noreply@blogger.com