And the selection of which facts are relevant to measure, by the participants, is rooted in theory.I don't know why this is so hard for you understand.That is not hard to understand.All science is based on theory.There is no fact without theory, and there is no conclusion about the relationship between facts without theory.AGW is held in contempt because it is a rouse for central planning.All economics is nothing but theoretical statements of universal laws governing choice and human action.Should we toss out economics because it is rooted in theory?
Yes, all science is based in theory at one time, until it is proven to be fact.Theory is the culmination of opinion, fact on the other hand?I think the answer is self explanatory.
Theory is never proven to be fact, in modern empirical science.Instead, scientists attempt to falsify theory and if they can't, they accept it for the time being. Though, they never claim to have found something "true."I am not an empiricist, so this does not describe my thinking regarding theory.And no, theory is not the culmination of opinion.That is outright nonsense and is an example of why discussing this topic can become so painful, on here.
Pay close attention.1: the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another2: abstract thought : speculation3: the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art <music theory>4a : a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action <her method is based on the theory that all children want to learn>b : an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances —often used in the phrase in theory <in theory, we have always advocated freedom for all>5: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <the wave theory of light>6a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigationb : an unproved assumption : conjecturhttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory
The mere selection of certain phenomenon to record and observe, in nature, for the purpose of establishing a factual account of some event, requires a theory of what caused what, if only to separate the aspects of nature that are relevant to our question from those which are not.And I am afraid the dictionary and the cribs notes fail to shine much light on these types of questions...In this debate on theory, method, fact and reality, I am debating with myself.
And losing on top of it all.Which brings us full circle, you are basing a society on unproven theory.To convince anyone your theory will work, you need solid facts to back it up, none of which exist.You are a dreamer, a theoretician, an experimenter in human nature.Like I said earlier, I'd love to live in the world you describe, but man has proven since the beginning of time, he does not learn from his mistakes and needs to be ruled, or he himself will attempt rule over others.It's human nature of conquer or be conquered, even the animal world lives by these laws, and we are no different as a species vying for the top of the food chain.Our Founders were on the same idea that less rule was better, and I totally concur, but they too knew that man needed structure, but also knew that structure needed containment which led to the development of the Bill of Rights.And now look where we are, nearing the precipice of socialism or survival.Your system, like so many before it will also be in a continual state of flux fighting for it's very preservation, one that would quickly fail without the threat of severe pain, something man understands.
His theory works perfectly.................as long as the bad guys never outnumber or outgun the good guys.
Exactly!The whole concept, is and would always be extremely vulnerable.It's basically a true Democracy, and we know from history just how well those workout.
It would be great if it could work like that, but it leaves out so many things, that it's not worth considering.The military, the behavior of corporations in which no one individual is responsible, a penal system to punish the people that won't comply.............in the end, what you have is government. There's no way around it.
But noooo, that can't be, TL specifically stated it's not a Govt. I know, you can't have tranquility if people don't have barriers with which to work within, people need to know that others are Bound by the same rules, rules that carry more than simple excommunication.Those removed from this grand experiment will unite and chaos will soon be the rule of the day.Corporations will quickly arm themselves creating security forces, and not one will be in charge.Africa is a perfect example of what happens when warlords take power, and that's exactly what the corporations will be, modern day warlords.
Well, I still like TL and his contributions to the forum. I don't agree with the anarchy thing though. I just can't imagine it working. Especially if it was implemented today, with our massive populations of dependents and criminals.