Topic: ... (Read 1959 times)
I see the right to equal treatment as being important. Some people say the NAP entitles you to discriminate on grounds of race or religion in who you do business with and who you hire.
Is that your interpretation of the NAP?
Is that your interpretation of the NAP?
I don't see the Non-aggression principle as a guideline for a lifestyle. I think Hitler himself could have been a racist crazy that he was and still been a NAP follower, he would have just had to piss jews off to get them to attack him first.
So in simple terms you don't see non-discrimination laws as being against the NAP? We are fine then
Discrimination is a form of ignorance and coercion is it not?
Ignorance yes. Coercion? Well it violates the right to equal treatment so I think you are right. There are others here who feel very strongly that racial discrimination cannot be restricted under the NAP.
What does Nghtrppr think? He's the one who sets out the challenge :O
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
I see the right to equal treatment as being important. Some people say the NAP entitles you to discriminate on grounds of race or religion in who you do business with and who you hire.
Is that your interpretation of the NAP?
Is that your interpretation of the NAP?
I don't see the Non-aggression principle as a guideline for a lifestyle. I think Hitler himself could have been a racist crazy that he was and still been a NAP follower, he would have just had to piss jews off to get them to attack him first.
So in simple terms you don't see non-discrimination laws as being against the NAP? We are fine then
Discrimination is a form of ignorance and coercion is it not?
I see the right to equal treatment as being important. Some people say the NAP entitles you to discriminate on grounds of race or religion in who you do business with and who you hire.
Is that your interpretation of the NAP?
Is that your interpretation of the NAP?
I don't see the Non-aggression principle as a guideline for a lifestyle. I think Hitler himself could have been a racist crazy that he was and still been a NAP follower, he would have just had to piss jews off to get them to attack him first.
So in simple terms you don't see non-discrimination laws as being against the NAP? We are fine then
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
I see the right to equal treatment as being important. Some people say the NAP entitles you to discriminate on grounds of race or religion in who you do business with and who you hire.
Is that your interpretation of the NAP?
Is that your interpretation of the NAP?
I don't see the Non-aggression principle as a guideline for a lifestyle. I think Hitler himself could have been a racist crazy that he was and still been a NAP follower, he would have just had to piss jews off to get them to attack him first.
Exactly? No. If you get Stefan Molyneux here to make his argument or if you'd like to do it in his stead, I'm more than willing to debate.
I wonder if it would be productive. If I was Molyneux I wouldn't debate someone who started of with "I don't think UPB is worth reading." because "I started reading it, couldn't make much sense of it and gave up." followed by a statement that nobody is willing to do the intellectual work for you. That's very interesting. What was the flaw that you discovered with his reasoning?
I never finished it. I started reading it, couldn't make much sense of it and gave up. Nobody else has been able to give me a good summary of the argument.
I also notice that nobody has attacked my argument head on so I'm guessing they can't?
I see the right to equal treatment as being important. Some people say the NAP entitles you to discriminate on grounds of race or religion in who you do business with and whom you hire.
Is that your interpretation of the NAP?
Or one could just read my last post.
He knows I'm not Atlas. He was implying that I'm behaving like him.
You are all getting off-topic and you won't like me when you get off-topic.
Atlas, is that you?
Read War and Peace, On the Nature of Physical Laws and Fifty Shades of Gray to obtain your answer.
Or one could just read my last post.
Atlas, is that you?
Read War and Peace, On the Nature of Physical Laws and Fifty Shades of Gray to obtain your answer.
That's very interesting. What was the flaw that you discovered with his reasoning?
I never finished it. I started reading it, couldn't make much sense of it and gave up. Nobody else has been able to give me a good summary of the argument.
I also notice that nobody has attacked my argument head on so I'm guessing they can't?
Atlas, is that you?
It's bitcoin2cash.
Isn't that exactly what you're doing?
Exactly? No. If you get Stefan Molyneux here to make his argument or if you'd like to do it in his stead, I'm more than willing to debate.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
That's very interesting. What was the flaw that you discovered with his reasoning?
I never finished it. I started reading it, couldn't make much sense of it and gave up. Nobody else has been able to give me a good summary of the argument.
I also notice that nobody has attacked my argument head on so I'm guessing they can't?
Atlas, is that you?
I never finished it. I started reading it, couldn't make much sense of it and gave up. Nobody else has been able to give me a good summary of the argument.
I also notice that nobody has attacked my argument head on so I'm guessing they can't?
Isn't that exactly what you're doing? I also notice that nobody has attacked my argument head on so I'm guessing they can't?
That's very interesting. What was the flaw that you discovered with his reasoning?
I never finished it. I started reading it, couldn't make much sense of it and gave up. Nobody else has been able to give me a good summary of the argument.
I also notice that nobody has attacked my argument head on so I'm guessing they can't?
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
Aggression is a matter of situation - morality doesn't come into it.
Behavior is innate, and the most pacifistic person will find themselves abusing Abu Ghraib prisoners quite willingly if they happen to be in that situation. They will contribute to genocide if they happen to be in a situation of genocide. And they will justify their actions philosophically and morally.
A principal is just a principal, and human behaviour has never been controlled by principal. It's always been informed by our innate biology, which is situational.
Behavior is innate, and the most pacifistic person will find themselves abusing Abu Ghraib prisoners quite willingly if they happen to be in that situation. They will contribute to genocide if they happen to be in a situation of genocide. And they will justify their actions philosophically and morally.
A principal is just a principal, and human behaviour has never been controlled by principal. It's always been informed by our innate biology, which is situational.
I don't think UPB is worth reading.
That's very interesting. What was the flaw that you discovered with his reasoning? I've read Machinery of Freedom a couple of times. It's worth it for the quotes alone. I don't think UPB is worth reading.
It is well written and has a great tone doesn't it
You get the feeling that an evening in a bar with Freidman would be fun even if politics never got discussed. Jump to: