diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'org')
| -rw-r--r-- | org/.dir-locals.el~ | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | org/actors/actors.org | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | org/anarchofoss/anarchofoss.org~ | 5 |
3 files changed, 2 insertions, 11 deletions
diff --git a/org/.dir-locals.el~ b/org/.dir-locals.el~ deleted file mode 100644 index d00959c..0000000 --- a/org/.dir-locals.el~ +++ /dev/null @@ -1,4 +0,0 @@ -;;; Directory Local Variables -;;; For more information see (info "(emacs) Directory Variables") - -((org-mode . ((eval . (add-hook 'after-save-hook #'ox-haunt-export-to-html 0 t))))) diff --git a/org/actors/actors.org b/org/actors/actors.org index 2ff6070..ad7d17e 100644 --- a/org/actors/actors.org +++ b/org/actors/actors.org @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ #+TITLE: What Is An Actor? -#+DATE: +#+DATE: <2023-07-30 Sun> #+TAGS: Praxeology, Empiricism, Philosophy, Philosophy of Science I've been reading Mises' /Human Action/ recently, and engaging with the praxeological method. It's done wonders for my economic thinking, and stimulated some thoughts about philosophical and scientific frameworks in general. I've found Mises' lack of rigor in thought (compared to the mathematics and physics to which I'm accustomed) somewhat annoying; maybe this /Man, Economy, and State/ behemoth that's on the stack after HA will resolve that, or I'll be forced to do it myself. In any case, I've been thinking about what an "actor" in a Miscesian sense actually means, as that seems to be the obvious starting point for formalization. @@ -34,4 +34,4 @@ I therefore identify three approaches to increasing human knowledge (i.e. improv * Footnotes [fn:2] Note that this has the desirable epistemological property of characterizing fields of inquiry on the basis of eternal, /a priori/ categories of human experience, not on the basis of a particular methodology. This allows one to identify deeply historical developments as a primitive predecessor of modern understanding (e.g. myth as mathematics), and prevents the usual "No True Scotsman" nonsense that confounds traditional, analytical accounts of these fields on methodological basis. A reasonable criticism is that the additional things satisfying the definition merely confound terms; however, in arguing against those additional things, I believe you'll find their unsuitability for directing gainful action to be their ultimate rebuttal, and accordingly, it's more reasonable to consider them bad exemplars of the purpose they serve, common to their methodologically-developed analogs (and often derivatives) today. -[fn:1] I use the slightly more unwieldly "abstract thought" as opposed to "abstraction" to avoid confusion in the final analysis, which adopts the platonist view that abstraction objects exist independent of human experience, as that which engenders abstract thought, just as material objects engender concrete sensation. +[fn:1] I use the slightly more unwieldly "abstract thought" as opposed to "abstraction" to avoid confusion in the future final analysis, which adopts the metaphysical platonist view that abstraction objects exist independent of human experience, as that which engenders abstract thought, just as material objects engender concrete sensation. diff --git a/org/anarchofoss/anarchofoss.org~ b/org/anarchofoss/anarchofoss.org~ deleted file mode 100644 index 8f38f42..0000000 --- a/org/anarchofoss/anarchofoss.org~ +++ /dev/null @@ -1,5 +0,0 @@ -#+TITLE: Free Software: A Shining Example of Nongovernmental Externality Control -#+DATE: -#+TAGS: Praxeology, Empiricism, Philosophy, Philosophy of Science - -The most common economic argument against the anarcho-capitalism alleges the absolute necessity of coercion in provisioning public goods, or preventing the tragedy of the commons. There are obvious theoretical rebuttals from an Austrian perspective (how does the /state/ know what is a "public good?"), but for the sound rhetorical strategy of engaging your opposition on his own terms counterexamples are required—hopefully more accessible than medieval Iceland. |