[Rancid]

What system do you propose we live under.

[RedPillAger]

What system do you propose we live under.

i don't propose to tell you, nor anyone else, what system, if any, you must live under. i only ask that you don't force yours on me.

[Rancid]

Easy to say, but not practical.

[RedPillAger]

Easy to say, but not practical.

Full Definition of PRACTICAL (from Merriam-Webster)
1 a : of, relating to, or manifested in practice or action : not theoretical or ideal <a practical question> <for all practical purposes>
b : being such in practice or effect : virtual <a practical failure>
2 : actively engaged in some course of action or occupation <a practical farmer>
3 : capable of being put to use or account : useful <he had a practical knowledge of French>
4 a : disposed to action as opposed to speculation or abstraction
b (1) : qualified by practice or practical training <a good practical mechanic> (2) : designed to supplement theoretical training by experience
5 : concerned with voluntary action and ethical decisions <practical reason>

i'm a voluntaryist. i am so because it is the only moral political philosophy that can exist without contradicting itself during implementation. it is the only realistic, utilitarian, practical stance one can take. any other moral political philosophy you try to adopt will necessarily contradict itself, rendering itself non-existent in practicality. take note of the 5th definition.

you believe what you do because it is all you know. you believe you need a master, because your masters told you so. you've never tasted true freedom, or you wouldn't think it so impossible.

[mikema63]

i am so because it is the only moral political philosophy that can exist without contradicting itself during implementation.

People have pointed out that this is a ridiculous thing to say, many moral philosophies happily exist without self contradiction. You are forcing your view that all force is illegitimate on other philosophies. I do not believe that all force is illegitimate. I do not believe that force or violence is inherently wrong.

P.S. The beginning of sentences are supposed to be capitalized, as well as I.

[fuser]

Stop forcing capital letters on other people, Mikema? Where did you got that authority from?

[RedPillAger]

People have pointed out that this is a ridiculous thing to say, many moral philosophies happily exist without self contradiction. You are forcing your view that all force is illegitimate on other philosophies. I do not believe that all force is illegitimate. I do not believe that force or violence is inherently wrong.

P.S. The beginning of sentences are supposed to be capitalized, as well as I.

i've never said that all force or violence is inherently wrong, only the initiation of it. it's perfectly legitimate to use force in defense from another's initiation. you folks can call the things i say ridiculous all you want. what you cannot do is show the flaw in reasoning. further, i can show the flaw in your reasoning, if you'll provide me with an example.

[mikema63]

Stop forcing capital letters on other people, Mikema? Where did you got that authority from?

He is initiating force against my sensibilities.

i've never said that all force or violence is inherently wrong, only the initiation of it.

Let me be more clear then, I do not think the initiation of force is inherently wrong.

[RedPillAger]

Let me be more clear then, I do not think the initiation of force is inherently wrong.

do you think other people are wrong to initiate force against you? would you rather they not? would you mind being raped, beaten, kidnapped, or killed? what turns your moral compass? what is "wrong" to you?

[velvet]

I think you may eventually come to see that it does not "work" the way you think it does.

I doubt it. I've spent the last year or so shifting further and further from individualism.

what you cannot do is show the flaw in reasoning.

You're yet to reason why individuals are of some intrinsic value, something which your whole argument is balanced on.

If I'm just a cog in a machine - myself, and my actions, being contingent on forces outside my control (genetics and socialisation) - then why am I being valued?

do you think other people are wrong to initiate force against you? would you rather they not? would you mind being raped, beaten, kidnapped, or killed?

I don't think people should. That says nothing for whether it is right or wrong.

[Rancid]

This guy is pretty full of shit.

[RedPillAger]

This guy is pretty full of shit.

the intellectual capacity of your arguments is staggering.

[Lightman]

They can show no flaw in your reasoning because there is no reasoning. The non-aggression principle is taken up as an axiom of ethics; it is not arrived at through argumentation; for the libertarian, it is the basis of all further ethical argumentation. All we've established is that redpillager has different moral intuitions from everyone else.

[Rancid]

the intellectual capacity of your arguments is staggering.

There's nothing to argue. All you're saying is "don't force me to do anything, and don't force anyone else to do anything." That's all well and good.

[mikema63]

do you think other people are wrong to initiate force against you?

No, not necessarily, as with everything it depends on context. I do not believe it is wrong for me to be forced to pay taxes for instance, I also do not believe it is wrong for me to be arrested if I commit some type of crime.

would you rather they not?

Of course I would prefer it, however my personal preferences are not the basis of morality. I am not an egoist.

would you mind being raped, beaten, kidnapped, or killed?

These are not the only types of force, your definition is immensely broader than this, so why would you even bother to ask it like this except as a leading question?

what turns your moral compass?

I'm a utilitarian.

what is "wrong" to you?

Things that hurt more people than they help.

[RedPillAger]

No, not necessarily, as with everything it depends on context. I do not believe it is wrong for me to be forced to pay taxes for instance, I also do not believe it is wrong for me to be arrested if I commit some type of crime.

viewing this contextually, when you consent, they are not initiating force. you are paying taxes voluntarily. and you would be surrendering yourself consensually. you're avoiding the question.

These are not the only types of force, your definition is immensely broader than this, so why would you even bother to ask it like this except as a leading question?

you're avoiding answering it, regardless. if it would make you more comfortable...can you describe an initiation of force against you that you would oppose?

I'm a utilitarian.

some would say genocide is useful.

Things that hurt more people than they help.

i believe you've already contradicted yourself.

[mikema63]

viewing this contextually, when you consent, they are not initiating force. you are paying taxes voluntarily. and you would be surrendering yourself consensually. you're avoiding the question.

So, because I believe there are acceptable forms of force, they have magically transmuted themselves into not being force anymore when done to me. Such a wishy washy Orwellian definition of force is entirely useless. I'm not avoiding the question by any stretch.

ou're avoiding answering it,

Yes, I avoided a leading question. When did you stop beating your wife by the way?

some would say genocide is useful.

Utilitarianism is a moral philosophy where a moral decision must maximize happiness and well being. Genocide certainly doesn't.

Aside from that I'm open to actually arguing about the various utility of various actions.

i believe you've already contradicted yourself.

How? Taxing a million dollars from a billionare barely hurts him. If it's then used to feed 100 families they have greatly benefited. If it's used to save even one life it's benefited that person more than the billionaire has been hurt. If you murder someone you get revenge or whatever and their dead, so they are harmed far more than you benefit. I fail to see your perceived contradiction.

[RedPillAger]

There's nothing to argue. All you're saying is "don't force me to do anything, and don't force anyone else to do anything." That's all well and good.

you're a communist; some would say the ultimate collectivist. collectivism is antithetical to individualism that i espouse. you can't have it both ways rancid. you, like the rest, are contradicting yourself.

[Rancid]

I'm not a communist.

[RedPillAger]

Yes, I avoided a leading question.

you still avoided the question when i allowed you to lead. i'll ask again, can you describe an initiation of force against you that you would oppose?