It has validity or else I wouldn’t have said it nor would have my neighbors. I think I value. I think my neighbors are valuable. But that doesn’t mean you see any value in us or anybody for that matter.
What else are they but thoughts? I don’t get this. People think. That’s self-evident.
i don’t know why you are saying “restricting”.
maybe they are the best murderers.
maybe they were, i don’t know.
Yeah, you got it.
I’ve always had it. I think you just woke up to that fact. I think Htut has some misconceptions too.
So there can be no objective best. Why did we start debating then?
First, I never said “objective” anything. Second, the what is objective in the context of this discussion, could be noted: the man that did the road wasn’t in my imagination, he really did it. I’m a realist. Thirdd, you like debating ghosts what can I say.
I think wilderness’s point is that the man was obviously preferred, after the fact(After action took place). OTherwise people would not have preferred him. So we can objectively see that people chose the man, over other options.
It’s not a value that is taking place, it is a value judgement that has already taken place, in the past. And that this judgement is visible based on the actions observed.
That shows that man, in this case, was the elite choice one could say. The preferred option to other options. And yes, it would appear that it occurs naturally over market mechanisms.
At least thats what I am drawing.
I think you make another valid point on why it is objective too.
right. it’s visible, thus objective, not in my imagination. I mean the guy really lives up at the top this hill here. He’s a good man.
indeed
good picture.
filc, Wilderness,
I understand what you are saying, but the criteria is so specific:
“If Mr.X has a bulldozer and can build roads, then he is an elite among Wilderness’ neighbors”
I dunno, I suppose he is elite in those terms, but that seems so specific as to be unimportant.
I think this is just a semantics thing (again). I think we all agree that the market is a spontaneous meritocracy, which is a good thing, but that just because Mr. X is preferred in a market, doesn’t mean X jr., or the whole X tribe, is somehow superior to the Ys, or the Zs for ever and ever.
As far as building roads is concerned, if no one else has a bulldozer, then yes he would be the elite for that specific task. Don’t assign too much weight to the term elitist. An elite basketball player is not an elite stock broker, get it? People have already defined the term sufficiently here.