-
@Neodoxy-- Rothbardians (meaning, those who accept his proclivity for the Old Right) and right wing anarchists simply prefer the value of tradition; it's not about trying to force anything into the system of Anarcho-Capitalism. The right-wing element is simply stating that the Natural Order is inherently non-egalitarian and non-progressive. And
-
Conservative does not equal right wing. (I am a right wing radical). And classical liberalism is considered an inherently right-wing philosophy.
-
And I'm not a "former" anarcho-capitalist. I consider Rothbardian ancap as a right wing counterrevolution against the progressive state.
-
I would consider myself a reactionary right winger, not influenced by the people you described though.
-
And...gotlucky wins the thread and shows why physical determinism is incorrect =)
-
+1 on Physiocrat's point. Yes, physical determinism assumes (1) that a deity exists who has planned/pre-programmed everything or (2) that all time exists concurrently. I think Physiocrat and I agree that (2) is certainly not the case. And, personally, I think (1) could be true or untrue, as an agnostic. So physical determinism seems unlikely to
-
I'll take a shot at hashem's question. (1). Will is man's ability to consciously choose actions.[1] (2). Man's conscious choices (and actions) are free from being predetermined, " because a necessary cause does not lead to a single inevitable effect." [1] " the faculty of conscious and especially of deliberate action
-
I think everything can only be predetermined IF a deity exists, and can plot the future course of time. To suppose that everything is predetermined now assumes there is a tangible future. There is not. Thus, the future is essentially a random design, regardless of the fact of causality. Here's some points that make sense to me from WIkipedia's
-
I think metaphysical libertarianism is a perfectly fine explanation. Why must everything be "predetermined"? Sure, there are determined "natures," such as human nature, which are not subject to change. But that doesn't mean that "fate" or "destiny" exist. Part of the nature of man is to have free will. And
-
I definitely agree with Minarchist; the metaphysical libertarian vs. determinist debate is wholly irrelevant to the political libertarian vs. statist debate. That needs to be made clear. Even if a murder is predetermined, it is still fundamentally, axiomatically, and entirely wrong, and should be punished, even if that punishment is predetermined.