posted by sleepy-sniper on July 10th, 2023 at 9:23PM
> Molyneux, and Hoppe and Kinsella and Dave Smith and Michael Malice all thought that EVERYONE UNIVERSALLY PREFERS TO BE GOOD
They don't even know what "good" is. And neither do you. It's relative, subjective, and arbitrary.
They don't even know what "good" is. And neither do you. It's relative, subjective, and arbitrary.
|
posted by dennisn on July 10th, 2023 at 11:08PM
All us ancaps know what it is. Hoppe and Kinsella and Malice would frame it differently, but arrive at the same NAP conclusion. Kinsella comes at it from a legal perspective (estoppel). Hoppe comes at it from a linguistic angle (argumentation ethics). I think Malice might use Moly's UPB framing, but probably reword it more pedestrianly. Dave Smith would use UPB.
Ancaps don't define "the good" - more evidence that you don't even know the position you're attacking. You strawmanning faggot :P. Again, read more, type less. We define "the bad" - initiation of aggression, and only those actions can be acted upon (as revenge, retaliation, defense). No positive obligation can be universally justified.
|
