http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/20/%e2%80%9cwhat%e2%80%99s-a-%e2%80%98principle%e2%80%99%e2%80%9d/ Conservative and Libertarian Intellectual Philosophy and Politics Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:00:53 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/20/%e2%80%9cwhat%e2%80%99s-a-%e2%80%98principle%e2%80%99%e2%80%9d/comment-page-1/#comment-78234 Patrick Mulligan Wed, 20 May 2009 13:29:19 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/?p=6021#comment-78234 You assert that principles are not self-interpreting, which may be true, but they are descriptive of certain characteristics, so we may easily determine which behaviors fit a princple and which do not by relying on the definitions of the words we use to construct the principles. For instance, "small government" as a principle naturally precludes making the government larger - be it in terms of the amount of regulatory power it wields, the amount of money it spends, the amount of people it employs, etc. While a Democratic Party politician may not proclaim to disagree with "small government" as a principle, we may judge by his actions whether or not his behavior defines that principle. So principles are not without meaning, nor are they of such little meaning or such ambiguity that they are irrelevent as a matter of practicality. I believe the GOP is indeed in a crisis of principles, because what you may see as platitudes like "small government", "individual liberty", "free market capitalism", are no longer reflected in the behavior of the party, and the party is indeed grappling with whether or not those principles even <i>should</i> guide their behavior. There really <i>is</i> a difference between modeling your behavior on the concept of "small government" and modeling your behavior on the concept of "larger government"; or between "free market capitalism" and "centrally-planned economy". You assert that principles are not self-interpreting, which may be true, but they are descriptive of certain characteristics, so we may easily determine which behaviors fit a princple and which do not by relying on the definitions of the words we use to construct the principles. For instance, “small government” as a principle naturally precludes making the government larger – be it in terms of the amount of regulatory power it wields, the amount of money it spends, the amount of people it employs, etc. While a Democratic Party politician may not proclaim to disagree with “small government” as a principle, we may judge by his actions whether or not his behavior defines that principle. So principles are not without meaning, nor are they of such little meaning or such ambiguity that they are irrelevent as a matter of practicality. I believe the GOP is indeed in a crisis of principles, because what you may see as platitudes like “small government”, “individual liberty”, “free market capitalism”, are no longer reflected in the behavior of the party, and the party is indeed grappling with whether or not those principles even should guide their behavior. There really is a difference between modeling your behavior on the concept of “small government” and modeling your behavior on the concept of “larger government”; or between “free market capitalism” and “centrally-planned economy”.

]]>