Liberal Paradox

[Rakhal DAVE]

See the article
http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/wendy-doniger-mr-lewd-and-ms-prude-114021400613_1.html
This was a start of an interesting discussion
(another set of updates follow of an
ongoing discussion between Janak and me)
Below is my response to the link above ....

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 22:42:06 +0100 (W. Europe Standard Time)
From: Rakhal DAVE <rak...@olsen.ch>
To: Janak Mulani <janak....@canoo.com>
Subject: Re: a good one


I could not understand it.

In the first para:

'One aspect of it concerns the obsessions of liberals that only what they
certify as liberal is liberal. '

What is an example of something liberals have taken away
from someone who wants it - simply because it was not
certified as liberal? [I am talking about 'wants' which
cannot cause bodily harm or damage to property of someone else].

I also could not understand this:

"Sounds fine, said Sen, except that this solution makes society worse off
because both individuals prefer that Ms Prude read the book to the actually
chosen outcome that Mr Lewd read it."

Is Mr. Lewd a liberal he would not want Ms. Prude to read it.
From a liberal perspective we would simply say:
People who want to read it should
and those who dont want to read it should not.

Also in the neighbours example ...
I cannot understand how following the liberal principle
automatically implies that each would pick a colour
offensive to the other.

If you do understand any of it - do explain.

I am also boggled by the glowing comments following the
article - because everyone
seems to understand this logic but me.

-Rakhal

On Fri, 14 Feb 2014, Janak Mulani wrote:

> http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/wendy-doniger-mr-
> lewd-and-ms-prude-114021400613_1.html
>

[Rakhal DAVE]

See Janaks response below:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2014 00:36:24 +0100 (CET)
From: Janak Mulani <janak....@canoo.com>
To: Rakhal DAVE <rak...@olsen.ch>
Subject: RE: a good one

Hi Rakhal,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_paradox

'One aspect of it concerns the obsessions of liberals that only what they
certify as liberal is liberal. '

Liberal view is also a view - a belief held dearly by liberals just like a
belief held by an illiberal.

> which cannot cause bodily harm or damage to property

What about mental harm? Of course there has to be some gradation here but
when codified in a law becomes black and white.

"hurt sentiments" which has been codified in the law in India and the
reason why penguin thought it wise to not fight further. Doniger too
blamed the laws and not the publisher.

In India a post on facebook disliking say a bandh called by Sena on
Thakrey's death can "hurt sentiments" and land one in jail.

>
Is Mr. Lewd a liberal he would not want Ms. Prude to read it.
From a liberal perspective we would simply say:
People who want to read it should
and those who dont want to read it should not.
>

If a well is being polluted, liberals may say those who want to drink may
and those who don't want may not. But some would fight over whether to
allow pollution of the well in the first place and then the argument is
about the definition of pollutant.

> I am also boggled by the glowing comments following the article -
because everyone seems to understand this logic but me.

I did not find any comments.

Regards,

Janak

[Rakhal DAVE]

Thanks for the link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_paradox
I have read it carefully.

In both examples Lewd/Prude and Alice/Bob
the highest rank is given to outcomes where
one individual enjoys anothers suffering
at the expense of his personal best choice.

Concretely:
a) 'However, he would get even more enjoyment out of Prude being forced to
read it'
b) 'Alice hates Bob with a passion, and she would gladly endure a red
house if it meant that Bob would have to endure his house being yellow. Bob
similarly hates Alice, and would gladly endure a yellow house if that
meant that Alice would live in a red house.'

If society had predominatly such individuals liberalism would not
work for them (and the result would be pareto inefficient
in their case). But that would be good!

If examples proving liberalism is suboptimal
must invent individuals with sadistic tendencies
and then demostrate the outcome is not the happiest
for them - that should be fine.

Consider the following / regarding your reference to 'mental harm':
People may not like to see other
people naked walking on the street. The liberal view
is that people must wear clothes as in a public
place people will experience the sight of naked people
by accident and that is valid mental harm.
On the other hand - Books, Plays, Dramas, Exhibitions
have synopsis. You know what you are getting into.

Mental harm is a valid concern if an individual
experiences something personally.
If individual feel mentally harmed because
someone else decides to experience something
in their privacy - this is again akin to sadistic tendencies.

In other words it seems examples where liberalism is sub optimal
is when considering existence of individuals who get
happy at others suffering or unhappy at others enjoyment.

Regarding poisoned well:
The common good is served by closing access to the well.
Keeping it open could lead to bodily harm
because of accidental use by someone.
Why would a liberal argue against that.

Regards -Rakhal

[pnmaddy]

Hi Rakhal

What is your samsung number. Pls install whatsapp. I will add  you in beer club list. 

Regards

Madhavan

Sent from Samsung Mobile

-------- Original message --------
From: Rakhal DAVE <rak...@olsen.ch>
Date: 15/02/2014 2:09 AM (GMT+01:00)
To: new-liberal-p...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: Liberal Paradox



See Janaks response below:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2014 00:36:24 +0100 (CET)
From: Janak Mulani <janak....@canoo.com>
To: Rakhal DAVE <rak...@olsen.ch>
Subject: RE: a good one

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "New Liberal Party of India" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to new-liberal-party-o...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to new-liberal-p...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/new-liberal-party-of-india.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.