Messages

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

106

General / Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole

« on: July 23, 2010, 11:32:17 AM »

Smith's attitude isn't unique. I've dealt with a friend of mine who is an author of one novel and a book on 19th century premillennialists. In the case of the second book, some dude was photocopying it to sell it for five bucks a pop to fellow students since it was a required text in the class he was taking. She got all bent out of shape about it. I don't blame her in the sense that the dickhead should've at least given some residuals copyright or no. But I disagreed with her on the whole point that it was a law. I asked her time and time again to show me how she can own an idea. She simply kept going back to the Barney Fife position (IT'S THE LAW!).

107

General / Re: liberty tattoo FTW!!

« on: July 23, 2010, 11:28:09 AM »

Anyone know anything about UV tattoos? I think it'd be pretty sweet to get one on the inside-arm.

Anything with such components that are reactive to light are probably not good to use as tattoo ink. Considering that firstly it would probably break down (fade out) faster than normal ink, and that it may have chemically reactive compounds that are easily toxic in the quantities needed for the job.

108

General / Re: Why I am not a Voluntaryist.

« on: July 23, 2010, 11:22:41 AM »

NAP is something I follow. So it follows that I can not initiate others to do as I do. One has to accept that others are going to behave differently than you do.

But again, what is the logical justification for NAP? Consequential? Or something else? I tend to think NAP is a logically non-consequential statement of the fact that humans are beings of harmony. And despite all the assumed stories of conflicts, wars, and violence that humans are more often able to get along even if there is still unclarified issues.  What is important is that NAP by itself doesn't justify or impede the formation of other institutions, or that these institutions themselves are not given (default mode).

One also has to accept that maybe the most abhorrent thing, like genital mutilation, you can think of might be common practice by others. One also has to accept that you don’t know everything so there might be a very good reason why others are practicing genital mutilation. What would be wrong would be forcing your life philosophy, morals or societal practices upon people that don’t want to live that way.

It's not so much a matter of forcing anything, but it is a matter of accepting such acts. If NAP is coupled to moral nihilism, then everything goes and NAP becomes self-refuting. But if NAP is coupled to a non-nihilist moral theory (probably moral realist in nature), then it can sustain itself and be part of a larger family of moral statements. This means that not only is NAP moral (and necessary to the human condition), but not all moral statements are predicated upon NAP. And that NAP and these other non-NAP predicated moral statements are predicated on some universal principle that ties them together. NAP by itself simply doesn't cut it, if you get what I'm saying.

109

General / Re: Why I am not a Voluntaryist.

« on: July 23, 2010, 11:16:24 AM »

It is not a violation of the NAP for someone who is against abortion to stand outside an abortion clinic offering anonymous adoption services and low-cost maternity care.

So long as the advocate is not blocking the entrance, I'm just fine with it. And I think if the anti-abortionists took their violence and vitriol out of their efforts, they could work together with the clinics to make sure that the customer knew they had options.

Persuasion is not force.

It would also help with the emotional problems some people associate with abortion, which I think is mostly emotional trauma from feeling trapped and hopeless.

Would you say that a father kicking out a daughter who has had or will have an abortion constitutes coercion? If not, why? I'm just wanting to get a feel for your ideas on this.

110

The Show / Re: How the Islamic Political System ensures Good Governance?

« on: July 22, 2010, 11:51:00 AM »

Yeah, MA, I never really understood how people have smeared the Medieval muslim states considering that they even allowed some forms of banking in their later years (although a bit too late if you understand the economic shift that occurred during the Crusades). Many were fairly friendly to foreigners and were keen on trading in goods and knowledge. I won't go so far as to say it was optimal as there were problems, but it was as close to a fairly free society (save for other periods in human history like in Iceland) any part of the human species ever experienced.

Things have changed for the worse.

Only if you take the short term view. I tend to agree with Jeff Rigenbach that things have gotten better in the long term.

111

The Show / Re: How the Islamic Political System ensures Good Governance?

« on: July 22, 2010, 11:41:56 AM »

Yeah, MA, I never really understood how people have smeared the Medieval muslim states considering that they even allowed some forms of banking in their later years (although a bit too late if you understand the economic shift that occurred during the Crusades). Many were fairly friendly to foreigners and were keen on trading in goods and knowledge. I won't go so far as to say it was optimal as there were problems, but it was as close to a fairly free society (save for other periods in human history like in Iceland) any part of the human species ever experienced.

112

General / Re: Retards think music are drugs "I-Dosing"

« on: July 22, 2010, 11:37:17 AM »

Yeah, most are bullshit. You can't get the dream-like state from static. You have to use something like the chants of Christian or Buddhist monks. The repetitive droning sets up the brain to go into alpha wave after a few minutes. But any distractions will easily kick you out of it.

113

General / Re: liberty tattoo FTW!!

« on: July 22, 2010, 11:32:29 AM »

Well, personally, the stars are what I find distracting on the shoulders. I would've gone with something somewhat asymmetrical to lead eyes from left to right (or the opposite if you wanted to be readable upside down. :3).

114

General / Re: The Free L. Neil Smith AudioBooks Project

« on: July 22, 2010, 11:27:31 AM »

[...]  it takes so damned long to finish producing an audiobook  [...]

That depends on many things, like the desired quality, length and genre of the book, if you have one actor doing all the voices or multiple people, if those people are in the same studio or are trying to do something innovative (ex. rehearsing and recording it over Skype), the talents of the people involved, etc.

Such hardness! Just have each volunteer do one chapter.

If one does good voices, good. If one just reads the text, good again. Different styles, different people, but done quickly and cheap.

Some folks have shitty voices for reading aloud or have no skill in it. See any of the Audible books read by Brad Pitt.

115

General / Re: liberty tattoo FTW!!

« on: July 22, 2010, 11:26:33 AM »

I'm sorry, but why ink up your body? You look pretty, I think it spoils your natural beauty.

116

General / Re: Retards think music are drugs "I-Dosing"

« on: July 22, 2010, 11:25:55 AM »

There's some evidence that certain frequencies will induce different brain waves like extremely low tones can induce alpha waves, but this doesn't mean you'll trip out. More like you'll have a more dreamy feeling and possibly be susceptible to suggestion.

117

General / Re: Why I am not a Voluntaryist.

« on: July 22, 2010, 11:23:03 AM »

I wouldn't say that's sufficient in certain cases. Is it morally permissible to be a racist so long as you do so 'voluntarily'?

Yes. Just as it is morally acceptable for those Midwesterners to treat their women the way they do. Those are their culture's morals. What would be immoral is for someone outside that society stand back and pass judgement on their behavior based upon standards of their own morals.

Then how do you justify NAP?

118

General / Re: Why I am not a Voluntaryist.

« on: July 22, 2010, 11:21:42 AM »

Yes. Otherwise, I am forcing my morality on others.

Then it's not morality. More or less that means you would better fit in the camp of moral nihilist more so than moral subjectivist.

I may think something is wrong, but my using coercion to interfere in an entirely voluntary action is just more "wrong".

Im/morality is not a matter of degrees, but kind.

Two wrongs do not make a right. The ends do not justify the means.

I never said they did, but you seem to assume that is what I mean. I don't see ends nor necessarily means as divisible in moral arguments as often both are either the same object of moral arguments or one of them (means or ends) relate to the other as an inherent property. Either way one slices it, morality based on purely consequential grounds runs into weird situations (see the train argument made in utilitarianism).

Right now, that standard is whatever the man with the badge and gun says it is.

Then why doesn't it enforce the moral standard in most of the US that racist  slurs are bad and those that use them are low lifes? I never seen a cop ticket a race supremacist, but I've seen people give them a tongue licking that made one look like a complete jerk.

Just because it's normal doesn't make it right, or just, or moral.

You never read my original post did you? I suggest doing so to grasp the context my points.

That is why I asked you, and ask again, who has the gun in your scenario? What function of society is provided through coercion?

Your question is false as it assumes only force can be used to maintain social institutions. Who points the gun at most people as to not be racists? Who points the gun at most people as to not be rapists? The last time I checked it was no one as even cops are outnumbered by 'criminals' by a wide margin at least in the US. Nor could there ever be enough to maintain the illusion to any degree.

Because if there isn't one, then you're a voluntaryist.

False conclusion as I recognize there are social institutions and states which are not voluntary (just as me being a human on a certain continent is not voluntary, it's merely fact).

119

General / Re: Why I am not a Voluntaryist.

« on: July 21, 2010, 08:13:27 PM »

Um, nope, I don't believe I ever brought that one up. But I think I remember the article about it...

Also, on the whole permissible thing, then why don't you just call yourself a moral nihilist as you can come to the same conclusion of NAP without any ethical argumentation? The reason I bring this up is because either NAP is an ethical statement or merely a statement of consequentialist origin (more akin to an economic law). If it's the former, then it's part of a larger system of ethics which describes all human interactions. If it's the latter, it merely is a subset of economics. The problem with the latter being true is that it doesn't explain why other social orders have been successful without NAP. One example would be Chile under Pinochet, which even Milton Friedman in an interview used it as an example that capitalism was only a necessary condition for a free society, but not one that is sufficient. He recognized ethics was in the mix that gave society its capability to form economic orders (essentially, social order precedes economic order). 

120

General / Re: Why I am not a Voluntaryist.

« on: July 21, 2010, 07:55:02 PM »

Umm...yes, yes, yes, because there's no force or coercion involved, lack of force and coercion.

What was it I didn't grasp?

How do you prove that claim? What is the standard?

I'm not the one who started the thread with a claim.  If you recall, I asked questions, which you redirected to questions, which I answered.  My standard is initiation of force.

I wouldn't say that's sufficient in certain cases. Is it morally permissible to be a racist so long as you do so 'voluntarily'?

Though you did.  I may or may not take the time to dig up the thread, but you know perfectly well you did.

I'd like to see, I don't remember particularly. Maybe it was the post about an MtF in jail, wasn't it?