Theoretical ambitions

I write here about the sort of theories that I would like to read, and which I would like to write if I were sure of having time and an income. This is basically the stuff that I fantasize about in the shower.

Geometrical method

Social theories should be presented in geometrical style, à la Spinoza, though perhaps with more explanation of definitions and axioms than Spinoza employed, and possibly with answers to objections, à la Thomas Aquinas. This does not ensure that they are more likely to be right, but it makes claims more clear and distinct – whether they are meant as analytic or as synthetic, for instance – and it makes the connections between claims more explicit. Someone who wishes to criticize a claim made by a theory should be able to easily find all other claims on which it depends, and make explicit the stance of his criticism toward all of the dependencies and the validity and soundness of the inferences. This is best done if claims are emphasized and named, and referred to by their names, as is done in the geometrical style, where someone may say, for instance, “this follows from proposition 5 and axiom 2”.

Ethics into law

Natural-law ethics, which is already formulated deductively, should be put into the geometrical form just requested, and elaborated deductively to such a level of specificity that you can actually try particular cases by it. Positive law only exists because ethicists have slacked off.

Of course, I believe that an important practical aspect of law, viz., the measure of punishments, cannot be rationally determined in the abstract. A complete natural-law system of ethics should give some alternative standards of punishment so that the readers can apply the one that seems best to them, or formulate their own standards in relation to the ones given. For instance, historical standards of punishment from various countries could be given, alongside the opinions of notable philosophers, such as the Rothbardian “two teeth for a tooth” standard.

Supposing that there are no legitimate states, and that only legitimate states can apply coercive punishments, the judge who applies natural-law ethics would be determining the proper response of uncoercive punishers, viz., society at large, i.e., the decisions of individual buyers and sellers in the market to boycott or exclude the punished. As such, the judgment of the offenders would be broadcast publicly and each member of society would apply his own standards as he sees fit.

Once natural law can try all cases, its explicit rationality will evidently have more legitimacy than the state, and we may hope for a future where governments are not trusted to make laws.

Economics

Economics should also be developed according to the geometrical method. Since the Austrian School’s tradition already develops economics deductively, the translation should be straightforward, though laborious. Theories from alternative schools could possibly be translated as well.

The system of economics can then be synthesized with the system of ethics into a sound system of political theory, which can guide movements and revolutions. The greater clarity of this system would also allow it to more easily guide the revisionist reinterpretation of historical events; the geometrical system of economics would also be more easily used as a guide to methods in business and accounting.