Calling all UK Critical Thinkers! Please consider signing my petition!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-04-2013, 09:05 PM
RE: Calling all UK Critical Thinkers! Please consider signing my petition!
(12-04-2013 08:47 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(12-04-2013 08:36 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  This guy is arguing, a priori, that rights can only be established and protected by a state. This is simply not true and it is not what Spooner argued... ever. Natural rights are those which require no positive action from any other person. For example, in order that I respect your right to property, it is only necessary that I refrain from taking or damaging your property. I can respect your property rights without even knowing you and, I might add, without them being "a product of custom, intuition or statute". I can do ten million different things or I can do nothing at all and the whole while I am respecting your property rights.

Can you cite specific instances where you agree with this man's assertions? I can't find them, because he doesn't provide any but I'm sure you can. Once you have pointed them out, we can discuss them further.

Also, can you show me where there is a transcript of Spooner debating someone about his writings and, as you say, falling apart when they're scrutinized? I'd like to read that for myself because if I have something wrong, I want to correct it.

Where did I claim any of that? You presented a text I read the text you presented and then went a step further found a critical response to the raised issues and then stated my opinion of both his work and the criticism. If you disagree with my opinion of Spooners stated position thats fine but don't try to pretend an exchange happened that did not happen. I'm not claiming to have a doctorate in the life and writings of Lysander Spooner but from the argument you supplied he was using circular reasoning.

I answered to the critique you presented and then to your words, so where you claimed any of that is where I responded. Since the critique you presented did not have any references or citations and since you did not reference or cite anything, I asked that you do so. And it's not necessary to be well versed in the man. You say you read the treatise. I asked you to cite the sections or statements within it with which you disagree. That's all I did.

And frankly, all I know about your opinion of the writing is that you don't like it. I don't know that any of the assertions you made are correct because again, you did not provide examples of the portions you were attacking, nor did the author of the blog you linked. If I print the book on 8.5X11 paper, it's 43 pages long. There's is no way for me to know where on any given one of those 43 pages, you've found errors, unless you point them out.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2013, 09:28 PM
RE: Calling all UK Critical Thinkers! Please consider signing my petition!
(12-04-2013 09:05 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  
(12-04-2013 08:47 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Where did I claim any of that? You presented a text I read the text you presented and then went a step further found a critical response to the raised issues and then stated my opinion of both his work and the criticism. If you disagree with my opinion of Spooners stated position thats fine but don't try to pretend an exchange happened that did not happen. I'm not claiming to have a doctorate in the life and writings of Lysander Spooner but from the argument you supplied he was using circular reasoning.

I answered to the critique you presented and then to your words, so where you claimed any of that is where I responded. Since the critique you presented did not have any references or citations and since you did not reference or cite anything, I asked that you do so. And it's not necessary to be well versed in the man. You say you read the treatise. I asked you to cite the sections or statements within it with which you disagree. That's all I did.

And frankly, all I know about your opinion of the writing is that you don't like it. I don't know that any of the assertions you made are correct because again, you did not provide examples of the portions you were attacking, nor did the author of the blog you linked. If I print the book on 8.5X11 paper, it's 43 pages long. There's is no way for me to know where on any given one of those 43 pages, you've found errors, unless you point them out.

My main argument with him is in his presentation. Now maybe I'm reading it incorrectly but he does come across as very circular. I don't see how his main premise holds water legally speaking and without that his entire argument falls apart. If the constitution was meant to be binding for only 15 years or 20 years or even the generation of the founders and signers, it would have had a time limit placed in it. However it did not and it was ratified by every state (the 13 at the time and every state that entered into the union has agreed to follow the laws and precepts there in) The Libertarian argument is one from Ideal rather than one from workable law and that is what I meant by the last sentence I wrote. Ayn Rand is probably the most famous of these authors and her ideas are still being debated.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2013, 06:54 AM
RE: Calling all UK Critical Thinkers! Please consider signing my petition!
(12-04-2013 11:06 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  
(12-04-2013 07:52 AM)Chas Wrote:  I am sorry that you see my responses as hateful. They are certainly not dishonest.

I see you wasting your time and energy on a totally unworkable, unrealizable Utopian dream. You'd do just as well working on perpetual motion machines.

I say this because human nature is against your vision just as it is against communism or other systems that rely on the perfectibility of human behavior.

Until and unless we evolve much further beyond what we are now, intelligent apes, there can be no society of the type you envision.

You could spend your time working to reduce coercion and help to guide society in more cooperative ways. You could achieve something instead of nothing.

You're making assertions based on the presumption that human beings will be exactly the same in 150 years as we are today. History or more apropos, evidence, disagrees with your presumption. Human beings do not exist in a vacuum and thus, human nature is not static.

If I took your advise, I'd be as apathetic as you and the result would be that I would perpetuate the violence in society rather than reducing it.

Slavery didn't end through apathy. Women didn't gain equal rights through apathy and, society has not become more peaceful through apathy.

In the end, if I die only managing to have stopped the cycle of violence in my family, I will have done more to make society peaceful than every person who participates in it combined. I've already achieved that goal and am working with some degree of success with a number of other families. And to think... I've done it all without pointing guns or making threats and without begging my rulers to train their guns on people I don't like.


So you have never taught your children anything? You have never stopped them from doing something wrong or dangerous?

I am not apathetic, and your accusation is ignorant and offensive.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2013, 08:03 AM
RE: Calling all UK Critical Thinkers! Please consider signing my petition!
Relevant quotes on critical thinking:

"Knowing a great deal is not the same as being smart; intelligence is not information alone but also judgment, the manner in which information is collected and used." - Carl Sagan

"The objective of education is to prepare the young to educate themselves throughout their lives." - Robert Maynard Hutchins

"Too often we give children answers to remember rather than problems to solve." - Roger Lewin, Ph.D., British anthropologist and science writer

"Education is what remains after one has forgotten everything one learned in school." - Albert Einstein

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2013, 09:03 PM
RE: Calling all UK Critical Thinkers! Please consider signing my petition!
(12-04-2013 09:28 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  My main argument with him is in his presentation. Now maybe I'm reading it incorrectly but he does come across as very circular. I don't see how his main premise holds water legally speaking and without that his entire argument falls apart. If the constitution was meant to be binding for only 15 years or 20 years or even the generation of the founders and signers, it would have had a time limit placed in it. However it did not and it was ratified by every state (the 13 at the time and every state that entered into the union has agreed to follow the laws and precepts there in) The Libertarian argument is one from Ideal rather than one from workable law and that is what I meant by the last sentence I wrote. Ayn Rand is probably the most famous of these authors and her ideas are still being debated.

I'm not sure what you mean by presentation. Do you mean the style of his writing? He's repetitive, not circular. But maybe that's what you meant by presentation.

As for the premise of the argument, it is quite sound from a legal perspective. The constitution is a contract. It binds the unborn and those who have/had not read it to follow the dictates (laws) of others. This isn't legally binding in any form of law. To wit: You cannot sign a contract for your wife, your father, your children (born or unborn), et al. Only the person or people who sign a contract can be bound by its terms. The only exception that I'm aware of is power of attorney, which technically, isn't an exception since the person assigning POA has voluntarily and intentionally given over his or her decision making to the trustee.

The US constitution was written by a group of men and agreed upon by groups of men in the several states. It was not reviewed by the public writ large, nor was it signed by them. But even if we assume that everyone in the several states was able to read, understand and agree to the terms of the constitution... it still has no legal authority over their offspring.

You can argue that the constitution isn't a contract but that's like arguing that a Toyota Camry isn't a car. Everything about the constitution is contractual in its nature, it is a legal document and it has signors.

And, you can argue that the state has special privileges and as such, contract law doesn't apply to it. To which I would argue, yep. If you accept the might makes right premise and are willing to sacrifice the fundamental tenets of morality... it sure does. Wink

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2013, 09:18 PM
RE: Calling all UK Critical Thinkers! Please consider signing my petition!
(13-04-2013 09:03 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  you can argue that the state has special privileges and as such, contract law doesn't apply to it. To which I would argue, yep. If you accept the might makes right premise and are willing to sacrifice the fundamental tenets of morality... it sure does. Wink

To which I respond the constitution was based off of the common law of the time and was modeled after the british Magna Carta but went 1 step further and formalised the rules instead of relying on them just being a matter of tradition, thus why free speech is much more expansive in the United States and libel laws are easier to prove in Great Briton.

But please tell me what "fundamental tenets of morality" have been threatened by living in a "rule of law" society?

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2013, 09:18 PM
RE: Calling all UK Critical Thinkers! Please consider signing my petition!
(13-04-2013 06:54 AM)Chas Wrote:  So you have never taught your children anything? You have never stopped them from doing something wrong or dangerous?

I am not apathetic, and your accusation is ignorant and offensive.

I taught my son a lot of things. And if I had it to do all over, I would have taught him a lot less of what I thought and a lot more of how to think. But thankfully, I never showed disapproval or disgust when he reached different conclusions or pursued different interests than I and I never forced him to dress, talk or act like me.

And by stopping him from doing something wrong or dangerous, what do you mean? I didn't stop him from climbing trees, even though that can be quite dangerous. I never had to knock his hand away from a boiling pot on the stove because we never left him alone around something dangerous or we made sure he couldn't reach dangerous things. We simply explained to him what was and wasn't dangerous and what the results could be. Honestly, he made his own decisions about what to try/do. And he made good decisions, because he was well informed and he knew his parents supported him even in failure.

As for my comments about your apathy, I treat everyone I meet with kindness, curiosity and respect. Until they treat me otherwise. Afterward, I treat them how they treat me. You have no compunction toward launching hateful accusations toward me and from what I see, you are apathetic. And that's not even a personal attack... it's simply an observation.






Wink

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2013, 10:04 PM
RE: Calling all UK Critical Thinkers! Please consider signing my petition!
(13-04-2013 09:18 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(13-04-2013 09:03 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  you can argue that the state has special privileges and as such, contract law doesn't apply to it. To which I would argue, yep. If you accept the might makes right premise and are willing to sacrifice the fundamental tenets of morality... it sure does. Wink

To which I respond the constitution was based off of the common law of the time and was modeled after the british Magna Carta but went 1 step further and formalised the rules instead of relying on them just being a matter of tradition, thus why free speech is much more expansive in the United States and libel laws are easier to prove in Great Briton.

But please tell me what "fundamental tenets of morality" have been threatened by living in a "rule of law" society?

The Magna Carta is so very much more clear and concise than the US constitution that the two documents demonstrate almost no similarity.

I'm sorry, I should have said tenet. The respect for property. And property in the case of ethics is, first and most importantly one's body, which is the only property with which we enter this world. It is also the property that common law and the non aggression principle are based upon.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2013, 10:21 PM
RE: Calling all UK Critical Thinkers! Please consider signing my petition!
(13-04-2013 10:04 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  
(13-04-2013 09:18 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  To which I respond the constitution was based off of the common law of the time and was modeled after the british Magna Carta but went 1 step further and formalised the rules instead of relying on them just being a matter of tradition, thus why free speech is much more expansive in the United States and libel laws are easier to prove in Great Briton.

But please tell me what "fundamental tenets of morality" have been threatened by living in a "rule of law" society?

The Magna Carta is so very much more clear and concise than the US constitution that the two documents demonstrate almost no similarity.

I'm sorry, I should have said tenet. The respect for property. And property in the case of ethics is, first and most importantly one's body, which is the only property with which we enter this world. It is also the property that common law and the non aggression principle are based upon.

By what or who's authority do you derive your property rights? Outside of your own body I mean as I feel that is a separate matter. You have a deed to your house correct? Unless it is in morgage but then a bank or other lender would have such a deed. It's power of ownership derives from the state.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2013, 11:08 PM
RE: Calling all UK Critical Thinkers! Please consider signing my petition!
(13-04-2013 10:21 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  It's power of ownership derives from the state.

Head on over to Somalia (a presumed anarchy) and see about taking someone's home from them. Tongue

But seriously, I don't dispute that property rights are a concept that must be collectively agreed upon by society. All rights are concepts, so they have to be agreed upon by humans lest they wouldn't exist. We are born with thumbs, but not rights. However, material property rights are derived from natural property rights and there is no need of a state to make it so. In fact, were it not for the state, I would actually own my home. As it is, I merely own the "right" to control its use. And, the state is the only entity that can take my home without just claim to it.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: