-
[quote user="Knight_of_BAAWA"] [quote user="Anarcho-Mercantilist"]The phrase "initiation of force" cannot be logically defined without circularity[/quote]Nonsense. Do try to grasp that words have definitions. [/quote] How do you conclude that "nuclear weapon production...
-
[quote user="Juan"][quote user="Brainpolice"]But to address the original question, I'm not exactly a utilitarian (in the sense of making use of a pleasure/pain principle or in the sense of trying to make morality metric).[/quote] By calling you a utilitarian, I meant that you...
-
[quote user="Knight_of_BAAWA"] [quote user="Brainpolice"]I don't advocate the Kantian Golden Rule and the universalizability test. In fact, I've blogged repeatedly on why I think that universality by itself is insufficient, and sometimes too rigid.[/quote]Question: if someone...
-
No one should prove any ethical principle from the argument by performative contradiction. Instead, one should analyze the benefits and costs of each ethical principle, and then choose one which attains the maximum well-being or prosperity of the general population. The argument by performative contradiction...
-
I was at youTube today (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24nVarM20KQ) and got into a debate with someone who brought up the issue of Walter Block's support of voluntary slavery. He brought up the issue that in an anarcho-capitalist society, that there would be a risk of people signing their lives away...
-
[quote user="Juan"]It is self-ownership plain and simple - it's a fact - and facts don't need to be proved.[/quote] That's an utterly perfect example of circular reasoning: it's true because it's true. If you had said, "It's true because it's true, dammit,"...
-
In applied ethics there is a dilemma known as The Trolley Problem ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem ). It runs like this: A trolley is running out of control down a track. In its path are 5 people who have been tied to the track by a mad philosopher. Fortunately, you can flip a switch which...
-
Pauled, [quote] It is an impossibility proof. It shows that it is impossible to argue in favor of aggression, without falling into contradiction. It does not claim that argumentation, or any propositional justification or proof of non-aggression can physically prohibit aggression. It acknowledges that...
-
I think that someone who proclaims that they do not own themself is engaging in a performative contradiction, for they have to exercise their ownership over themselves in order to even make the statement. "I don't own myself" is a self-detonating statement. The most common counter-arguement...
-
[quote user="pazlenchantinrocks"]Children would not have the same rights as adults. The parents own the child until the child demonstrates that he can prove that he is a self-owner.[/quote]That's where I disagree with Rothbard. The notion that parents can own their children, even if it's...