Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Do you feel that conesrvatives discredit us?

rated by 0 users
This post has 368 Replies | 15 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 7,105
Points 115,240
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

'It would be practicable only in a world of people who are .......' <---(no moral words allowed)

 

close to god? have the same name as someone from the bible? be people that you lionize? have wings? have not committed any act contrary to the 10 commandments?

Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid

Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 7,105
Points 115,240
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

Poptech:
No you have not. Nothing you presented supports how Mises defined anarchism.

Mises clearly equated anarchism with lawlessness; and with the absence of insitutions that promote social order.

you think that ancaps are for lawlessness? that institutions that promote social order have no place in ancap society?

so are you calling Mises a moron for mistaking his opponents so shockingly?

Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid

Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 313
Points 6,560
Eric replied on Thu, Sep 24 2009 10:37 PM

laminustacitus:
Hopefully, there won't be a law against you. So, there's a bad consequence to the theory; nevertheless, its still far better than the terribly philosophically unsound NAP. 

Not it's not. It is absolutely terrible, and far worse than the NAP. First of all, in many cases you would not know if you are reducing the amount of social cooperation is society. Also, practically every criticism of utilitarianism could be refined and applied to this theory. Then there is the fact that different people have different ideas as to what constitutes an increase in "social cooperation" in society.

It is also not true that all thieves reduce the amount of social cooperation in society. Maybe I steal a painting, and the entire community cooperates together in order to return the painting to its rightful owner. In this example, the thief has increased the amount of social cooperation in society.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 757
Points 17,305
Poptech replied on Thu, Sep 24 2009 10:40 PM

The usage of "angels and saints" is common in Judeo/Christian cultures. If you are unfamiliar with it then it will not make any sense.

Angels (defined) - "A person whose actions and thoughts are consistently virtuous."

Saints (defined) - "a person of great holiness, virtue, or benevolence"

 

 

"Anarchism misunderstands the real nature of man. It would be practicable only in a world of angels and saints" - Ludwig von Mises

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Thu, Sep 24 2009 10:55 PM
holiness, virtue, or benevolence
Meaningless subjective gibberish about subjective morality. It doesn't help your (non)argument.

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 419
Points 8,260

Poptech:

Laughing Man:
Well here is his legal system in a nutshell. Say I like punching people in the face that I meet. I think that it is good [ moral ]. I walk up to person B and greet them in my face punching action and they say 'Hey I don't like that'. Well what are you going to say in a court case? 'Your honor, my subjective morality is better then his subjective morality....because.....'

Morality is not a legal argument. Morality is still subjective, it is your own personal beliefs of right and wrong. If mine are different than yours, who is right?

So are you a nihilist or a legal positivist?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,255
Points 36,010
Moderator
William replied on Fri, Sep 25 2009 1:19 AM

Juan:
holiness, virtue, or benevolence
Meaningless subjective gibberish about subjective morality. It doesn't help your (non)argument.

not meaningless when he put them in context and then proceeded to show in a context and then set the defintion.

"I am not an ego along with other egos, but the sole ego: I am unique. Hence my wants too are unique, and my deeds; in short, everything about me is unique" Max Stirner
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Fri, Sep 25 2009 1:44 AM
Dondoolee, I'm sorry but I can't take you seriously. I'll only say : it looks like poptech is a potential member of the stirner church.

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Fri, Sep 25 2009 1:46 AM
So are you a nihilist or a legal positivist?
sides of the same coin...

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 10 of 10 (369 items) « First ... < Previous 6 7 8 9 10 | RSS