unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by henry quirk »

All lives are equally valuable and all men should therefore have equal property too. And Liberty too.

but lou doesn't want any property: he's content to wander the land like cain from kung-fu with only himself to attend to, doin' good dees for strangers and whatnot

you'll make him have property?

and what if morris wants more than what you allot: is he prohibited from workin' for more?

you'll violate the liberty of both

A man's life, liberty, and property are only forfeit if he doesn't share his property with those in need.

so his life, liberty, and property aren't really his then

he must care, he must share: liberty is gone

A man's life, liberty, and property are only forfeit, in part or whole, when he uses either irrationally.

if his irrationality has him violatin' others: absolutely

too narrow, though cuz not all violations stem from irrationality

A man's life, liberty, and property are only forfeit, in part or whole, when he fucks a corpse or a chicken.

he's mentally diseased and needs help, but I ain't gonna force it on him till he begins violatin' persons

He must guard his property and liberty or else lose them to conquest, the strongest always wins.

yes, he must (self-defense)...truth is, the most clever usually wins

too narrow, though
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6268
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by FlashDangerpants »

henry quirk wrote: Fri Dec 31, 2021 3:20 pm All lives are equally valuable and all men should therefore have equal property too. And Liberty too.

but lou doesn't want any property: he's content to wander the land like cain from kung-fu with only himself to attend to, doin' good dees for strangers and whatnot

you'll make him have property?

and what if morris wants more than what you allot: is he prohibited from workin' for more?

you'll violate the liberty of both

A man's life, liberty, and property are only forfeit if he doesn't share his property with those in need.

so his life, liberty, and property aren't really his then

he must care, he must share: liberty is gone

A man's life, liberty, and property are only forfeit, in part or whole, when he uses either irrationally.

if his irrationality has him violatin' others: absolutely

too narrow, though cuz not all violations stem from irrationality

A man's life, liberty, and property are only forfeit, in part or whole, when he fucks a corpse or a chicken.

he's mentally diseased and needs help, but I ain't gonna force it on him till he begins violatin' persons

He must guard his property and liberty or else lose them to conquest, the strongest always wins.

yes, he must (self-defense)...truth is, the most clever usually wins

too narrow, though
None of those responses is relevant. I am arguing that your 3rd line isn't a logical necessity of the first two, I'm using the array of other shit that can go in its place to illustrate that.

How could you think I was trying to borrow your logic to argue on behalf of might is right? The point is that your logic doesn't work for any 3rd line.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by henry quirk »

None of those responses is relevant. How could you think I was trying to borrow your logic to argue on behalf of might is right?

I know...I didn't...kinda thought the cain from kung-fu thing made me mockin' you obvious

I was wrong

I am arguing that your 3rd line isn't a logical necessity of the first two, I'm using the array of other shit that can go in its place to illustrate that.

what you're doin' is arguin' against the 3 as though they were just an ordinance like don't exceed posted speed limit or stop at the red signal

as I say: the 3 are a codification of natural rights which are not arbitrary or legalistic...but you don't believe in natural rights so you can only see them as legalistic and arbitrary

it's the gulf between us I can't bridge
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by RCSaunders »

henry quirk wrote: Thu Dec 16, 2021 3:48 am Questions are welcome.
Just one.

When will the libertarian Utopia finally be realized and how will it be brought about?

Seems like various flavors of libertarians have been promoting the same ideology since Claude-Frédéric Bastiat (early 1800s). As part of the question, if such a libertarian society will not be realized in one's own lifetime, how much of their life and energy should one spend promoting and working for what they will never have?
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6268
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by FlashDangerpants »

henry quirk wrote: Fri Dec 31, 2021 3:43 pm I am arguing that your 3rd line isn't a logical necessity of the first two, I'm using the array of other shit that can go in its place to illustrate that.

what you're doin' is arguin' against the 3 as though they were just an ordinance like don't exceed posted speed limit or stop at the red signal
No, I am arguing aginst them as if they were intended to be some sort of argument with a structure, that because man owns himself, his libery and property, therefore it must be the case that he has some duty to recognise the same for others.

You know, philosophy stuff relevant to this thing called MORAL REALISM that's in the thread title.
henry quirk wrote: Fri Dec 31, 2021 3:43 pm as I say: the 3 are a codification of natural rights which are not arbitrary or legalistic...but you don't believe in natural rights so you can only see them as legalistic and arbitrary

it's the gulf between us I can't bridge
There's not much that is good to be said for an argument that is only plausible if you already believe it is true.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by henry quirk »

When will the libertarian Utopia finally be realized and how will it be brought about?

it wouldn't be utopia and I laid out a lil scenario of how the Free Zone might come to be in this thread's companion

if such a libertarian society will not be realized in one's own lifetime, how much of their life and energy should one spend promoting and working for what they will never have?

hey, it's my time and energy to waste...If I expend myself in unprofitable ways, and ain't takin' money out of your pocket, food offa your table, or shingles offa your roof: what do you care?
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by henry quirk »

You know, philosophy stuff relevant to this thing called MORAL REALISM that's in the thread title.

which you don't accept...which you can't argue from but only against (which you admirably)

I, however, am a moral realist...I can only argue from that place

neither of us accepts the premise or language of the other
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6268
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by FlashDangerpants »

There's not much that is good to be said for an argument that is only plausible if you already believe it is true.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by RCSaunders »

henry quirk wrote: Fri Dec 31, 2021 3:54 pm
When will the libertarian Utopia finally be realized and how will it be brought about?
it wouldn't be utopia and I laid out a lil scenario of how the Free Zone might come to be in this thread's companion
Yes, I read your description of the little isolationist commune you describe as your ideal society, but that does not answer the question. When will it actually happen, if you really think it is going to.

[You may not call it, "utopia," which only means an, "ideal," society, but if it's the best possible, why wouldn't it be a utopia?]
henry quirk wrote: Fri Dec 31, 2021 3:54 pm
if such a libertarian society will not be realized in one's own lifetime, how much of their life and energy should one spend promoting and working for what they will never have?
hey, it's my time and energy to waste...If I expend myself in unprofitable ways, and ain't takin' money out of your pocket, food offa your table, or shingles offa your roof: what do you care?
Spend as much time and energy pursuing anything you like. The question was not about how you choose to live your life, but how you would recommend others allocate their resources. Certainly you aren't saying, "the society I've described is the best possible, but you shouldn't make any effort to realize it," are you?
promethean75
Posts: 4932
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by promethean75 »

"When will it actually happen"

Never, but such ideas give Henry Q. something to tinker with at a philosophy forum and that keeps em busy, keeps em sharp (relatively speaking).

The troof is, on planet erf, it'll be Marxism or bust. The rest is just background noise during the intermission.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by henry quirk »

There's not much that is good to be said for an argument that is only plausible if you already believe it is true.

“One word, Ma’am,” he said, coming back from the fire; limping, because of the pain. “One word. All you’ve been saying is quite right, I shouldn’t wonder. I’m a chap who always liked to know the worst and then put the best face I can on it. So I won’t deny any of what you said. But there’s one more thing to be said, even so. Suppose we have only dreamed, or made up, all those things-trees and grass and sun and moon and stars and Aslan himself. Suppose we have. Then all I can say is that, in that case, the made-up things seem a good deal more important than the real ones. Suppose this black pit of a kingdom of yours is the only world. Well, it strikes me as a pretty poor one. And that’s a funny thing, when you come to think of it. We’re just babies making up a game, if you’re right. But four babies playing a game can make a play-world which licks your real world hollow. That’s why I’m going to stand by the play world. I’m on Aslan’s side even if there isn’t any Aslan to lead it. I’m going to live as like a Narnian as I can even if there isn’t any Narnia. So, thanking you kindly for our supper, if these two gentlemen and the young lady are ready, we’re leaving your court at once and setting out in the dark to spend our lives looking for Overland. Not that our lives will be very long, I should think; but that’s a small loss if the world’s as dull a place as you say.” -the dour Puddleglum from The Silver Chair

-----

When will it actually happen

hell if I know...mebbe never

if it's the best possible, why wouldn't it be a utopia?

mebbe cuz it's not the best possible...mebbe it's only better than what we have now (in my view)

how you would recommend others allocate their resources(?)

I only recommend folks recognize their ownness and respect the ownness of others (and mebbe stop listenin' to, and fundin', TPTB): if folks did that and nuthin' else we'd be better off than we are

I read your description of the little isolationist commune

accordin' to flash, it would anything but isolationist: the way he describes it, it would be an economic engine of depravity
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by henry quirk »

The troof is, on planet erf, it'll be *Marxism or bust.

you may be right: *tyrants and *slavers, we may never be rid of 'em (but, mebbe, if we keep 'em out of government [by not havin' a government {a legislature}] we don't need to) 👍
promethean75
Posts: 4932
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by promethean75 »

What'll happen is, if anything happens, a Marxist system will assemble from the ground up out of some major global revolution event, staged unwittingly by infuriated people who not only don't even know they're doing a Marxist revolution, but are probably even passionately against Marxism - this because capitalist/conservative propaganda has successfully brainwashed and hypnotized the entire western world... but it gets funnier even; in addition to being brainwashed in advance, they still haven't a clue about what it is they've been taught to reject (such as yourself), and so they'd do it all accidentally. This is Monty Python material if you ax me.

Lol he said 'tyranny and slavery'. There couldn't be better antithetical terms for Marxism. No seriously. It's that bad with these people. They're like zombies or sumthin. We need Brad Pitt. Where the fuck is Brad?
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by henry quirk »

There couldn't be better antithetical terms for Marxism.

mob rule: worse tyranny there is (and that's assumin' the people don't just give over to the first fast talker comin' down the pike...you know, that finer clay who makes the slick appeal to man's fatal tendency
promethean75
Posts: 4932
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: unpacking a moral realism: a companion to 'libertarianism in practice'

Post by promethean75 »

Everything's mob rule tho. Get this. Did you know that unless there are as many people voting for one guy as there are voting for the other guy, your individual vote is irrelevant? Right? Only if there is a 50/50 balance of votes, would any single vote even matter. So it's only always a majority, a mob, that works the scales in a democratic process.

Remember: when you hear/read some dashing philosopher in a whig sitting by his oil lamp in the office on the third floor of his magnificent estate mutter the words 'mob rule', what he's really trying to say is 'please don't let the marxists take over and make me get a real job. I prefer to continuing living for free.'
Post Reply