| | Michael,
If I understand you correctly, I think of it as more a matter of statistics... as in economics. You are a primary agent in the field of economics in that you make a choice to buy something. But your purchase alone would not so effect the overall supply and demand for that product as to determine the outcome.
You wrote: ...how established morals and norms evolve slowly in a process we can't understand or predict the outcomes of by competing with new ideas... I see a number of evolutionary processes going on simultaneously. The slowest of them is the genetic evolution, where, in this case, we could imagine some trait related to a genetic capacity to create or evaluate ideas is resulting in a differential in rates of the reproduction of that trait. I.e., are we getting smarter or dumber - as a genetic characteristic? That is an evolutionary process that relates to ideas... very indirectly, and it is ticking over slowly in the background. However, I don't see it has having any short term, or any overpowering effect when compared to the other evolutionary processes that are in play.
Each individual is evolving as they formulate beliefs, accept principles, and form psychological patterns regarding understanding and acting. They are building an entire personal universe and it is a kind of evolutionary process where the more basic patterns and principles become the fields of competition for new ideas, or new practices. The agent that is active here is not the DNA or genes of genetic evolution, but rather their volition, their choice.
Then there is the competition in the outer world of their subculture, and the wider predominate culture. In this broad field of ideas, beliefs, and practices we can model it as an evolutionary domain by referring the different ideas, or collections of ideas as Memes and see them as the agents that attempt to use individuals to get themselves reproduced. In this model, for the most part, we ignore reason, logic and individual choice (kind of holding them constant) and looking at the results of different new ideas being defeated by traditional views versus the new ideas overturning older, more settled ideas. This is a model that attempts to look at ideas the way we look at genes and from that stance, try to determine what contributes to the successful reproduction of a given idea.
Needless to say, unlike the determinists who are the most fond of this model, Objectivists need to hold in mind the fact that like economics, where individual consumers make individual purchase decisions which may or may not be rational and that what is of value to one person as a purchase may not be for another, that the total effect on the economy is not much more than a statistical summation. So it is with Memes and cultural evolution. But unlike genetic evolution, there is a much tighter tie between individual psychological processes, epistemological examinations of reasoning processes and belief systems, and with the 'evolution' of a culture or a set of ideas. These are more like different looking glasses through which we are viewing different aspects of very similar things.
-------------- ...a traditionalism that says reason can’t find objective standards for judging a social order... I don't fully grasp your connection between evolution of social systems and having an objective standard for judging them. It should be clear that some things are objectively bad for man, others are objectively good, and yet others don't have any significant effect. Then the arguments begin as to which set of standards do the best job of defining the good.
Assuming some agreement exists on what is good for man, someone might argue that central planning is the best way to implement that standard (and we would show them they were wrong :-)
If their argument was that central planning will be more effective in reaching desirable ends than allowing individuals to make their own choices because of the willy-nilly nature of social evolution, and because social evolution isn't predictable... well, they are coming from the political control freak position of "I insist on forcing everyone to do what I think is best, because having my way is more important than your freedom to do what you want." Not exactly an argument that wins me over!
|
|
