Philosophy Now Forum

"Well the irony is that you can't be a consequentialist unless you believe in some form of natural law"

That ain't how I understand consequentialism (it's just what's best for the most, best defined as 'fed, sheltered, maintained, etc.', it's not a moral view, just a practical one), it's the primary strain of libertarianism out and about and it's led to, for example, the Libertarian party advocating for 'universal guaranteed income' which is an anti-liberty notion.

#

"in my view only kleptocrats and religious nuts would disagree with the broad scope of that."

You'd think that would be the case. It's not.

#

"I disagree. Over here there are reports of Islamic Schools radicalising some students. I don't know how much of that is true and how much is paranoid delusion or straightforward racism, but it is not something that children should be taught in my view. Nor do I think that fundamentalist christians should teach children that the way to bring about Armageddon and the day of judgement is to start another war in the middle east. Should commies be allowed to teach the stuff by that awful Mr Marx? I think as a general rule teaching children that every question can be answered by reference to a few books and that men in frocks can be trusted, is teaching them to be stupid; which to me is an abuse of their natural right not to be a fucking idiot."

This is freedom: muslims, christians, commies, atheists, etc get to transmit their views to their kidlets. Hell, they can teach their kidlets that 1+1=3 if they like. Then they can have holy wars and jihads over it. Bad ideas are perpetuated through repression. If you want bad ideas extinguished, let 'em flourish, be found wanting and fade away. Of course, you have to resist those bad ideas, through word or big honking gun (whichever seems most appropriate), but those bad ideas, to lose in the market of minds, must be aired out, be examined, be tried, or they never go the Dodo's way.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2019 5:07 pm "Well the irony is that you can't be a consequentialist unless you believe in some form of natural law"

That ain't how I understand consequentialism (it's just what's best for the most, best defined as 'fed, sheltered, maintained, etc.', it's not a moral view, just a practical one), it's the primary strain of libertarianism out and about and it's led to, for example, the Libertarian party advocating for 'universal guaranteed income' which is an anti-liberty notion.

Natural Law is, in most ways, a kind of opposite of the various Consequentialisms. Consequentialism, as the name implies, judges the value of actions by outcomes, but Natural Law says that moral values exist prior to the taking of any particular action, and are not dependent on how that action "works out".

The only way of saying that they are similar is to assume that Natural Law will always lead to the desired outcome...that is, that those who obey the natural, objective moral values written into nature will always somehow end up winning in a consequential way. And that seems hard to believe.

This is freedom: muslims, christians, commies, atheists, etc get to transmit their views to their kidlets.

We've already seen what happens when each of these things is given full license.

Out of a predominantly Judeo-Christian moral and epistemological ethos, we got the West and Israel. Out of a Muslim ethos, we got the majority of the Middle East, and some of southeast Asia. And out of Atheism, we got Russia, China, Cambodia, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea...and so on. So that's how all of that has played out already.

War.

Even so: I won't prohibit. I'll defend against.

Everyone gets to play.

Preachers get the street corners, Imams get the sidewalks, ANTIFA gets the medians. Bitch, moan, complain, cry, condemn, but don't block my path. Call me sinner, infidel, and capitalist pig, but don't block my path. Beat your wives, castrate your daughters, take a crap in public, but don't block my path. Plot and plan for the End Times, Sharia-ize everything, have your love-ins in your tents, but don't block my path.

Craft your private hells and heavens, establish your utopias and dystopias. Knock yourself out, but, for your own sake, leave me be. Leave mine be. Seriously.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2019 4:50 am

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2019 1:01 am "Interesting points, Henry. On the whole, I pretty much agree with you."

All the right people (and Robot Overlords) do. Seems only pussies and commies and necrophiliac mom bangers don't.

#

"I think you’re saying that there’s really just one law: don’t mess with someone else’s life, liberty or property except under special circumstances (e.g., self defense). That makes sense."

Square on the head, Common.

#

"There are few societal institutions (which could just as well be private rather than governmental): courts, police and the military (the military could be utilized on infrastructure during times of peace). Good idea."

With courts, constabulary, and military you're lookin' at what I think of as essential services. Someone to arbitrate dispute, someone to investigate dispute, someone to keep invaders out. Not sure how to classify them (sumthin' less than government, sumthin' more than private services). The key feature of the three is they're employees, never directors, never leaders. They don't comprise a state. They don't rule.

#

"With the militia ruling the the other 3, there’s just one question that comes up: who or what controls the militia?"

Each adult in the militia.


The Night Watchman model I propose is a fragile thing (no more or less than the current American system, but still), and to work needs a mature citizenry. Mature, in context, means self-directing, self-relying folks with little patience for parasites or politicians. No doubt there'd be circumstances where folks might disagree on whether courts, constabulary, or military had overstepped, but law is rather stark and minimal and unambiguous in a minarchy, and it won't take long for anyone to recognize if violations had occurred.

Hangings (at the worst) and bein' shot in the ass with rock salt (the best) would be common penalties for proxies who look to be more than proxies.

Would either 'you', "henry quirk", or the one known as "common sense", or both, like to discuss these points in more detail?

Obviously they are very personal and only one-sided views of things, which could and would never work in practice.

Which of the above points would never work in practice?

Which of the above points would never work in practice?

Not a one.

Why?

Cuz we don't have a mature citizenry.

Three quarters or more of the American population is well-domesticated.

It's almost enough to make a minarchist cry...almost

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2019 9:32 pm

Which of the above points would never work in practice?

Not a one.

Why?

Cuz we don't have a mature citizenry.

Three quarters or more of the American population is well-domesticated.

A minarchy simply isn't in the cards in the here and now.

Now, if we get up and out, things might play out differently. There and then, minarchy might work.

Till then: the uneven American experiment, as is, is the best, the only, show in town.

Henry, are you saying that none of your ideas would not ever work? Or are you saying that every one of your points would not ever work?

It seems like the “why” explains why all the points would not work under current circumstances. Yup?

Yep.

Minarchy, as I see it, only works if the citizens are mature (self-reliant, self-directing, with an extremely low tolerance for parasites, politicians, pussies, and puddin' heads).

Today: Americans are conflicted and soft, thin-skinned and wound up, too eager to please and too eager to appease.

Domesticated.

Minarchy isn't for us, not right now.

Even the Libertarians aren't worth a good god damn.

henry quirk wrote:
Yeah, oil, that's it: and that black gold was worth every brown, heathen soul.

So much for the libertarian minarchist.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2019 10:25 pm

henry quirk wrote:
Yeah, oil, that's it: and that black gold was worth every brown, heathen soul.

So much for the libertarian minarchist.

just yankin' your *anti-american chain, doofus.









*you're gettin' to be as big a butt as veg...you used to be a good egg...now: you're just another reactionary

henry quirk wrote:just yankin' your *anti-american chain, doofus. ...

Dur! As if I didn't understand that, unfortunately a fair percentage of your countryman think exactly like your words so I respond to them.

How many times! I am not anti-American but apparently any comment upon the Yanks actions is now anti-American, roll on McCarthy.

I was just pointing out to imp that he left off an avowed Christian nation from his list of mass killers with guns.

*you're gettin' to be as big a butt as veg...you used to be a good egg...now: you're just another reactionary

Oh boo-hoo! Woe is me.
p.s.
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

What does “minarchy” mean?

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2019 2:49 am

Impenitent wrote:
tell that to the crusaders, communists and the jihadists...

-Imp

Maybe tell it the Yank as in the last few decades they've destroyed a couple of countries and led to a couple of million deaths.

history never repeats...

-Imp

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2019 10:51 pm

henry quirk wrote:just yankin' your *anti-american chain, doofus. ...

Dur! As if I didn't understand that, unfortunately a fair percentage of your countryman think exactly like your words so I respond to them.

How many times! I am not anti-American but apparently any comment upon the Yanks actions is now anti-American, roll on McCarthy.

I was just pointing out to imp that he left off an avowed Christian nation from his list of mass killers with guns.

*you're gettin' to be as big a butt as veg...you used to be a good egg...now: you're just another reactionary

Oh boo-hoo! Woe is me.
p.s.
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

HA! And with that, you just re-good egg'd yourself...

In hindsight: I was just bein' persnickety...my apologies

commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2019 11:23 pm What does “minarchy” mean?

here's a lil intro...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night-watchman_state

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 1:46 am

commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2019 11:23 pm What does “minarchy” mean?

here's a lil intro...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night-watchman_state

Thanks!