WebSeitz/wikilog
Open Society
Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

(backlinks off) (map off)
(search off)
last edited by BillSeitz on Jul 2, 2008 3:39 am

Term first proposed by [Henri Bergson] and later expanded by .

any different from ?

Summary - "Open society" is a way to describe the positive aspects of democracy. At the most fundamental, philosophical level, the concept of open society is based on the recognition that people act on [Imperfect Knowledge] and that no one is in possession of the ultimate truth (). In practice, an open society is characterized by the ; respect for , minorities and minority opinions; the division of power (); and a . Broadly speaking, open society is a way to describe the positive aspects of .

Here's another summary from . Open society is based on the recognition that we act on the basis of imperfect understanding. Perfection is beyond our reach; we must content ourselves with an imperfect society that holds itself open to improvement. The acceptance of imperfection coupled with a constant search for improvement and a willingness to submit to critical examination are the guiding principles of an open society.

The of is at http://www.soros.org/osi.html It funds and organizes a lot of interesting projects, but seems to lack the boosterism of the crowd.

article in [The Atlantic]: "Toward a Global Open Society". Recognition of our fallibility is necessary but not sufficient to establish the concept of the open society. We must combine it with some degree of altruism, some concern for our fellow human beings based on the principle of reciprocity. Any variety of Asian, or other, values would fit into a global open society, provided that some universal values reflecting our fallibility and our concern for others - such as the freedom of expression and the right to a fair trial - were also respected. Western democracy is not the only form that an open society could take. In fact, that the open society should take a variety of forms follows from the epistemological argument.

Are any of these attributes ends in themselves? I don't think so. So what is the end? What are the goodness-criteria? Because what we have here, of course, are a set of elements...


My current list of priorities for making the / society more open: (some of these items seem a bit peripheral, have to chew a bit more...) (see )

Shut down the process. as .

Let's get some review of legislation and executive orders since Sept11 (e.g. , ).

Get some good and markets going, so that information can take the place of regulation. (Consider how many areas below have relevance to this...)

End the

Likewise decriminalize other -s (and I have a narrow definition of force, , and victim)

Protect the universal general-purpose computer from stupid legislation

Make the government the lead guinea pig in the

More choices/experiments - decentralize

Eliminate . End subsidies, which should encourage more global .

Give people ownership of their

Make a defined-contribution plan instead of defined-benefit!


At the same time that no one has [Ultimate Truth] (), no one is completely out of touch with it either. --

[[monopoly of money]] --2003/09/08 02:42 [GMT]
End the [Monopoly Of Money] held by private banks. See reinventing Money for loads of good reading and links. Josef Davies-Coates of uniteddiversity ()

How to create --2003/09/28 09:32 [GMT]
see http://www.terrahome.net.tc please

The most Open of all Open Society Means Full Sharing of All Information --2003/11/12 03:04 [GMT]
Everyone seems to have a way to save the world. Here is one you must read: http://betterdifferent.com

decriminalize marijuana and coke,heroine,? --2003/11/27 13:38 [GMT]
Our offsprings will all be nuts if this is done.Who the hell are you to come up with such ideas ?This whole thing is schizophrenic.Soros became a billionaire in a democracy, so what the hell does he want to change ?

2004/01/07 11:54 [GMT]
More . End [Corporate Personhood]. More -s. More .

See : | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |


 




Bill Seitz, fluxent at gmail dot com, Weblog