<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Intellectual Trespassing as a Way of Life &#187; Fatal Flaws</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.blog.ellerman.org/category/fatal-flaws/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.blog.ellerman.org</link>
	<description>An interdisciplinary blog on the human sciences and current events</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 15:19:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Inalienable Rights: Part III A Litmus Test for Liberalism</title>
		<link>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/03/inalienable-rights-part-iii-a-litmus-test-for-liberalism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/03/inalienable-rights-part-iii-a-litmus-test-for-liberalism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 19:21:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Ellerman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fatal Flaws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intellectual history]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inalienable rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Rawls]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Montesquieu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pact of subjection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert Nozick]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self-rental contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self-sale contract]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blog.ellerman.org/?p=31</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Surely it is not too much to ask a modern liberal theory of justice that it provide a coherent account of why some contracts, e.g., self-sale contract, should be deemed invalid and why the rights such contracts would legally alienate are inalienable. In that sense, the theory of inalienable rights provides a historical litmus test for liberalism.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/03/inalienable-rights-part-iii-a-litmus-test-for-liberalism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Inalienable Rights: Part I The Basic Argument</title>
		<link>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/03/inalienable-rights-part-i-the-basic-argument-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/03/inalienable-rights-part-i-the-basic-argument-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 22:21:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Ellerman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fatal Flaws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intellectual history]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inalienable rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nontransferability of human action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nontransferability of human decision-making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nozick]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal alienation contracts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blog.ellerman.org/?p=24</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What is the inalienable rights theory that descends from the Reformation through the Enlightenment and that answers the classical apologies for slavery and autocracy based on implicit or explicit voluntary contracts?]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/03/inalienable-rights-part-i-the-basic-argument-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Inalienable Rights: Part II Intellectual History</title>
		<link>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/03/inalienable-rights-part-ii-intellectual-history/</link>
		<comments>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/03/inalienable-rights-part-ii-intellectual-history/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 22:07:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Ellerman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fatal Flaws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intellectual history]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hegel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hutcheson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inalienable rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liberty of Conscience]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Luther]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reformation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spinoza]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stoics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blog.ellerman.org/?p=20</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Where did the ideas behind the inalienable rights theory emerge in the history of thought?]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/03/inalienable-rights-part-ii-intellectual-history/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The fatal flaw in finance theory: Capitalizing &#8220;goodwill&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/02/the-fatal-flaw-in-finance-theory-capitalizing-goodwill/</link>
		<comments>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/02/the-fatal-flaw-in-finance-theory-capitalizing-goodwill/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 18:02:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Ellerman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economic theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fatal Flaws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capital theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capitalized value]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[finance theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[goodwill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Keynes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Miller-Modigliani]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[property rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blog.ellerman.org/?p=9</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The fatal flaw at the root of today's post is really what might be called "the fundamental myth" about the current property system, namely that the market-contractual role of being the residual claimant in a productive opportunity is treated as a "property right" that is currently owned by some legal party (e.g., the corporation having the contractual role) and that may be bought and sold as well as capitalized into the party's current valuation.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/02/the-fatal-flaw-in-finance-theory-capitalizing-goodwill/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Fatal Flaw in Cost-Benefit Analysis</title>
		<link>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/01/the-fatal-flaw-in-cost-benefit-analysis/</link>
		<comments>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/01/the-fatal-flaw-in-cost-benefit-analysis/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 23:42:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Ellerman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Current events]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economic theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fatal Flaws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cost-benefit analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kaldor-Hicks efficiency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[numeraire illusion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pareto efficiency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sarkozy Commission]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blog.ellerman.org/?p=6</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Part I of this commentary on the Sarkozy-Stiglitz Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, the focus was on the social engineering perspective underlying the search for such an index. But at the end of that commentary, I noted that the Commission&#8217;s discussion of different indices was rather &#8220;academic&#8221; since there [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.blog.ellerman.org/2010/01/the-fatal-flaw-in-cost-benefit-analysis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

