Order Clomid Online Legally - No Prescription DrugStore http://anthropos-lab.net/bio-nano/2007/02/lessigs-code-version-20/ ARC Collaboratory: Ramifying Synthetic Biology and Nanotechnology Sun, 13 Mar 2011 20:29:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 Order Clomid Online Legally - No Prescription DrugStore http://anthropos-lab.net/bio-nano/2007/02/lessigs-code-version-20/comment-page-1/#comment-10 ckelty Mon, 12 Feb 2007 15:49:42 +0000 http://anthropos-lab.net/bio-nano/2007/02/lessigs-code-version-20/#comment-10 As you might imagine, this is close to my heart. I often use Code v. 1 to teach about the status of objects and individuals in the internet, and his version of regulation does go part way towards being a novel concept. In part this is because he is willing to think beyond just government adminstration or economic incentivization to include "morality" (in a strictly Durkheimian sense, though I'm not sure he knows that) and "architecture" which includes both the built environment and the newly built environment of the net. Each of these areas--state, market, architecture, morals--"regulate" behavior. This is not the novel part thought. The novel part comes because he is an inveterate student of Law and Economics (he clerked for Posner), and he sees this scheme of regulability as a way to start thinking about new forms of control beyond state power or economic incentives. To put it differently, if Law and Economics discovered a way turn law and markets into a tools for engineering behavior, Lessig has added morals and architecture to the toolbox. His concept (and eponymous paper) of "The Regulation of Social Meaning" is directed precisely at this kind of action. I quote I've used in a couple of places sums up his recognition of the dangers, but it comes only at the end, and as an afterthought: <blockquote>The regulation of this school [Law and Economics] is totalizing. It is the effort to make culture serve power, a “colonization of the life-world.” Every space is subject to a wide range of control; the potential to control every space is the aim of the school...There are good reasons to resist this enterprise. There are good reasons to limit its scope. [1998:691]</blockquote> Lessig, Lawrence. 1995. “The Regulation of Social Meaning.” University of Chicago Law Review 62(3):944-1045. As you might imagine, this is close to my heart. I often use Code v. 1 to teach about the status of objects and individuals in the internet, and his version of regulation does go part way towards being a novel concept. In part this is because he is willing to think beyond just government adminstration or economic incentivization to include “morality” (in a strictly Durkheimian sense, though I’m not sure he knows that) and “architecture” which includes both the built environment and the newly built environment of the net. Each of these areas–state, market, architecture, morals–”regulate” behavior. This is not the novel part thought. The novel part comes because he is an inveterate student of Law and Economics (he clerked for Posner), and he sees this scheme of regulability as a way to start thinking about new forms of control beyond state power or economic incentives. To put it differently, if Law and Economics discovered a way turn law and markets into a tools for engineering behavior, Lessig has added morals and architecture to the toolbox. His concept (and eponymous paper) of “The Regulation of Social Meaning” is directed precisely at this kind of action. I quote I’ve used in a couple of places sums up his recognition of the dangers, but it comes only at the end, and as an afterthought:

The regulation of this school [Law and Economics] is totalizing. It is the effort to make culture serve power, a “colonization of the life-world.” Every
space is subject to a wide range of control; the potential to control every space is the aim of the school…There are good reasons to resist this enterprise. There are good reasons to limit its scope. [1998:691]

Lessig, Lawrence. 1995. “The Regulation of Social Meaning.” University of Chicago Law Review 62(3):944-1045.

]]>