As soon as one considers a system abstractly and theoretically, one puts himself, in effect, on the plane of the universal, thus, of the infinite. That is why reading the Hegelian system is so comforting. I remember having experienced a great feeling of calm on reading Hegel in the impersonal framework of the Bibliotheque Nationale in August 1940. But once I got into the street again, into my life, out of the system, beneath a real sky, the system was no longer of any use to me: what it had offered me, under a show of the infinite, was the consolations of death; and I again wanted to live in the midst of living men. I think that, inversely, existentialism does not offer to the reader the consolations of an abstract evasion: existentialism proposes no evasion. On the contrary, its ethics is experienced in the truth of life, and it then appears as the only proposition of salvation which one can address to men.
”The exercise of imagination is dangerous to those who profit from the way things are because it has the power to show that the way things are is not permanent, not universal, not necessary.”
- Ursula K. Le Guin
@ConceptualJames: Classical Liberalism fully embraces the concept of (scientific) universality, which I think is one of the most interesting
By: James Lindsay
Published: Oct 8, 2024
Classical Liberalism fully embraces the concept of (scientific) universality, which I think is one of the most interesting and important ideas to repelling arbitrary power and thus unleashing peace and prosperity. It's important to understand this principle. 🧵
Classical Liberalism accepts the realist axiom that the world exists independently of all observers, and the principle of universality rests upon that. The simplest expression of universality is "anyone can perform the test." That is a fantastically powerful, world-changing idea.
Because Classical Liberalism assumes realism, it assumes we have provisional and limited access to objectivity. This does not mean any given observer is objective. It means that no matter who the observer is, the facts of reality are the same and can be agreed upon.
So if I make a claim, or Trump does, or Kamala does, or Klaus Schwab does, or Bill Gates does, or some crackhead behind a dumpster does, any of us is able to check that claim against reality by making observations and doing experiments to test it. It doesn't matter who made it.
Furthermore, and more importantly, if I make a claim, or Trump does, or Kamala does, or Klaus Schwab does, or Bill Gates does, even some crackhead behind a dumpster can attempt to falsify that claim by checking it. "Expert" status, "royalty," credentials, etc., are all sidelined.
The principle of universality is simply that the facts of reality are what they are and they are equally accessible to any observer using adequate equipment to detect them and reliable methods for assessing them, expert, layperson, or crackhead.
The principle of universality lays low all bids for arbitrary power because anyone, literally anyone, in principle not even an anyone (e.g., a dog or a robot) could do the experiment for himself and obliterate the false claims of experts and rulers.
Classical Liberalism values this Common-Sense Realist view because it understands that (a) it is true, and (b) that it undermines all illegitimate power when fully applied. Classical Liberalism therefore takes steps to secure the freedom of speech, belief, and conscience.
Only people who are free to think, ask, investigate, and speak (report) their findings are capable of making productive use of the principle of universality, which in turn helps us to better understand reality itself and be less wrong, thus unleashing prosperity.
Anyone who is attempting censorship or other methods of curtailing free expression, belief, or thought is therefore attempting to abridge them to maintain their own (arbitrary, or unreal) basis for power and is an enemy of liberty and prosperity, whatever lies they tell.
The realism underlying universality can be contrasted against the idealism (Romantic, Neoplatonic, or otherwise) of other schools of thought, mostly which derive from the European continent and that have largely taken over the world falsely in the name of "liberalism."
In a realist system, we assume reality exists and is accessible to anyone, but in an idealist system, the true reality lies in a realm of ideals only fully accessible to the imaginations of the rightly initiated, who then have standing to rule over us based on their Election.
So in a realist system, every man is assessed to be capable up to the limits of his abilities, instruments, and methods to be able to assess reality for himself, and in an idealist system, at some point you need a guru who allegedly understands the ideal on your behalf.
The reason American Classical Liberalism built the greatest nation on Earth and unleashed more prosperity and liberty than any ever has is because of its grounding in realism. The reason it is in trouble now is because of heavy pollution by idealism of various sorts.
A different idealism (e.g., Fascism) is not an adequate answer to idealism (e.g., Communism) because it's just replacing one idealist system and set of guru-leaders (tyrants) with another. The answer to pollution by idealism is a return to realism.
This is fundamentally why Fascism is not actually an answer to Communism, even though it sells itself as the only possible answer to Communism. It's idealism based on a romanticized past that gives rise to new tyrants, who history has always proven to be temporary and fungible.
If we're going to unleash liberty and prosperity, we must move away from idealist systems and favor realism again. That is, Classical Liberalism is the answer to both Communism and Fascism.
"You think your pain and your heartbreak are unprecedented in the history of the world, but then you read. It was books that taught me that the things that tormented me most were the very things that connected me with all the people who were alive, or who had ever been alive."
🎶 ✨ congratulations! you made it! you made it to the center of the internet. it's an open source universal checkpoint! nothing special about it. we can rename it through a defined process
this document is socially constructed
please share your feedback with others about the peace declaration checkpoint proposal, we can discuss on social media websites, there are already several of these going on i believe
please note this point transcends time and space and there are infinite numbers of identical checkpoints each with variations
