In the field of psychology, the Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people of low ability have illusory superiority and mistakenly assess their cognitive ability as greater than it is.
So, used against any group, it's not a philosophical criticism; it's just rude.
Let's try to avoid that kind of thing here.
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
Frelga wrote:Someone commented on Twitter that libertarianism is Dunning-Kruger effect applied to politics.
I was about to drive all the way to New Hampshire and become a libertarian but thank God for this random person on twitter because now I see the error of my ways!
And thank you Frelga for this urgent public service announcement.
The odd thing is that libertarianism is actually based in an assumption that people don't have the knowledge or expertise to organise things on a large scale, hence their belief in spontaneous order, market forces and organic systems over any sort of planning. As Hayek wrote (albeit with pretty awkward phrasing): "All political theories assume, of course, that most individuals are very ignorant. Those who plead for liberty differ from the rest in that they include among the ignorant themselves as well as the wisest." So if anything, it's the reverse of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Túrin Turambar wrote:The odd thing is that libertarianism is actually based in an assumption that people don't have the knowledge or expertise to organise things on a large scale, hence their belief in spontaneous order, market forces and organic systems over any sort of planning.
So this might be my biology training acting up inappropriately, but this sounds like survival of the fittest. And since humans are a social animal, that means survival of the fittest group, however that group is organized (pack, tribe, nation, city-state, fiefdom, what-have-you). Thing is, humans developed alternative political systems because we collectively decided that we didn't like that outcome.
Túrin Turambar wrote:The odd thing is that libertarianism is actually based in an assumption that people don't have the knowledge or expertise to organise things on a large scale, hence their belief in spontaneous order, market forces and organic systems over any sort of planning.
So this might be my biology training acting up inappropriately, but this sounds like survival of the fittest. And since humans are a social animal, that means survival of the fittest group, however that group is organized (pack, tribe, nation, city-state, fiefdom, what-have-you). Thing is, humans developed alternative political systems because we collectively decided that we didn't like that outcome.
The old Social Darwinism smear. It makes me sorry I clicked to show the post.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."
-- Samuel Adams
There's a lot here. The idea of seasteading is compelling, in the age of rising seas. For it to become a reality on any sort of scale would require an effort that would dwarf space exploration, which means being led by the governments. With all their baggage. Plucky entrepreneurs won't cut it.
Concerning the libertarian angle, a couple things spring to mind. One, that it seems like there was never any concept of the ship being run entirely by its libertarians inhabitants. The crew, the people really essential to the endeavor were meant to be hired labor with no share in the utopia.
Two, that they seemed entirely blindsided by the realization that the proposed life in the close quarters of the ship would require a clearly defined and enforced set of rules, the opposite of the concept of unlimited personal freedom.
"What a place! What a situation! What kind of man would put a known criminal in charge of a major branch of government? Apart from, say, the average voter."
