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

Search

  • Re: The Law of Non-Contradiction

    [quote]1) I say an apple is red, you say purple. The law of non-contradiction is of no help here but it is often evoked in an attempt to prove that one of us must be right and the other wrong.[/quote] For this very reason, moral universalist arguments from consistency fail to make the case for one view over another.
    Posted to General (Forum) by Brainpolice on Mon, Jan 24 2011
  • Re: Mises, Quine, and the analytic/synthetic distinction.

    [quote] I would add the bold parts to make this more useful (and I would disambiguate "the signified" to "the intent" and "the interpretation," as per the bold text). the signifier — the "sound image" or string of letters on a page that one recognizes as a sign . the signified — the concept or idea
    Posted to General (Forum) by Brainpolice on Sun, Jan 23 2011
  • Re: Squatter Supported by Neighbors

    Actually, it seems silly to try to reduce the concept of abandonment to only the intention of the current owner, which effectively sides with whover currently has the title by defacto. If the qualitative state of the property has degenerated to the point where there is no substantive relation to whoever currently has a title, intent simply has nothing
    Posted to Current Events (Forum) by Brainpolice on Fri, Jan 21 2011
  • Re: "Left" Libertarians and "Left" Rothbardians.

    [quote]Did you just not read what I wrote? Left-Lib, paleo-libs, all libertarians endorse immorality by most standards. Saying "its wrong, but I won't stop you" looks like moral cowardice to many. (And science has no place with morality... keep "aim[ing] to be thin please.)[/quote] I think you're missing the point, although it
    Posted to Political Theory (Forum) by Brainpolice on Fri, Jan 21 2011
  • Re: "Left" Libertarians and "Left" Rothbardians.

    [quote]Thin libertarian= libertarianism is just about aggression and /or the NAP. Thick libertarian= libertarianism is about aggression and/or the NAP but also cultural concerns.[/quote] This isn't wrong, but I'd broaden that to: Thin libertarianism = the claim that libertarianism is a stand-alone political philosophy that can be separated from
    Posted to Political Theory (Forum) by Brainpolice on Fri, Jan 21 2011
  • Re: "Left" Libertarians and "Left" Rothbardians.

    Overall good post, JamesB, but I'd like to comment on some things. [quote]1. Semantics. TBH this is just annoying, to virtually everyone I think, but for some reason left-libertarians have made a big deal out of how libertarianism should be labelled and presented. It's not there is no validity to the the points made but I highly doubt they are
    Posted to Political Theory (Forum) by Brainpolice on Wed, Jan 19 2011
  • Re: A Left Libertarian Manifesto.

    It seems rather narrow to proclaim that those simply aren't problems at all. Even if one confines such questions outside the scope of legality, that doesn't mean they aren't problems. Do libertarians really want to be in the position of dismissing the existence of any social problem other than physical aggression and the state? If so, they
    Posted to Political Theory (Forum) by Brainpolice on Tue, Jan 18 2011
  • Re: Ownership for use only?

    An emphasis on context or situation is not a reduction to lifeboat scenarios. Lifeboat scenarios are only one kind of situation. The fact that one refuses to adopt an absolute a priori rule does not mean that one has no standard. The problem is that the very nature of an absolute apriori rule cannot account for particulars/details.
    Posted to Political Theory (Forum) by Brainpolice on Tue, Jan 18 2011
  • Re: What are you reading?

    "An Archeology of Knowledge" by Michel Foucault and "Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language" by Saul Kripke.
    Posted to General (Forum) by Brainpolice on Tue, Jan 18 2011
  • Re: A Left Libertarian Manifesto.

    [quote]OK, so no definition.[/quote] I would hardly consider the three decent-sized paragraphs I have written, which you have addressed none of the content of, as amounting to "no definition". [quote]Or just plain: capitalism = system of voluntary exchanges of private property (goods and services). It's very hard to leave such a basic
    Posted to Political Theory (Forum) by Brainpolice on Sun, Jan 16 2011
Page 1 of 283 (2821 items) 1 2 3 4 5 Next > ... Last ยป | More Search Options