> Ken wrote:
>
> > [I wrote:]
> > > I disagree that it's a deciding factor, though. If you place two people,
> > > with the same natural resources (I'm talking specifically about food, location,
> > > etc...) then they are utterly equal (as far as society is concerned). It is
> > > only when those people begin to interact with their surroundings that
> > > they may become more or less better off in relation to the other.
> >
> > "When those people begin to interact with their surroundings..."
> > *is* "how development proceeds".
>
> Yes, of course, but at that very instance, when they are returned to absoulte
> basic society, many political theorists say that this is the only time at
> which people are totally equal. As time progresses, freedom remains at a
> maximum, whilst equality is reduced. The State of Nature (if it really
> exists) will not last for very long at all.
Then "many political theorists" are using an easily falsifiable
assumption.
This is much worse than classical implementations of Communism failing to
account for the effective noncomputability of prices, wages, etc. The
mathematics/language to express that didn't *exist* when they started.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/ Towards the conversion of data into information....
/
/ Kenneth Boyd
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////