<t>yaaarrrgg;834020 wrote: <br/>
<br/>
However the theory is mute with respect to cases of obligation to society (which you say does not exist). That means, I have no obligation, under this view of morality to save a child's life if it is not my own. This conflicts with intuitive moral judgments ...

<t>koan;833583 wrote: Philosophical discussion of appropriate normative definitions of "morality" can be found here<br/>
<br/>
.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Plato was a believer in external authorities, like religion, and the state. Those people operating from within these external authorities arbitrarily ...

<t>koan;833537 wrote: <br/>
<br/>
There are "fatal errors" in this paragraph. You use emotional terms such as "evil" and "backward" and there are obvious projections of your ethnocentric analysis of world events.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
"Evil" and "backward" are objective terms describing acts of states ...

<t>yaaarrrgg;833507 wrote: I don't either, but my point is to test the moral theory. Does that conclusion follow from the theory? If this conclusion does not follow from the theory, it's a reason to either reject the theory, or suspect that it only presents a partial definition of morality.<br ...

<t>yaaarrrgg;832918 wrote: What I mean is that the state does not have any reality, other than what we give to it in our imagination. The state ... where is it? How much does it weigh? Is it real because people have guns, or because someone's written some words on paper, declaring its reality?<br ...

<t>yaaarrrgg;831856 wrote: That's an interesting analysis of morality (not sure I've heard it boiled down to property before). <br/>
<br/>
It's a valid analysis, and one of many ways to that bring us closer to an understanding of ethics. Although I wonder does it present a complete picture? How does ...

<t>yaaarrrgg;833083 wrote: Here's what I see:<br/>
<br/>
These DRO's contain a conflict of interest that may grow over time: accepting money to render decisions. This naturally makes them inclined to tilt their policies, like any reasonable business, in the direction that generates the most revenue ...

<r>Accountable;832498 wrote: But who would keep people from organizing groups to support each other against others with whom they disagree? <br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
What I'm saying is it's a really cool theory, but would require everyone to agree that anarchy is the way to go, which creates a de ...

<r>yaaarrrgg;831824 wrote: There's nothing wrong with the idea of anarchy in theory... I actually like aspects of both anarchy and socialism.<br/>
<br/>
But IMO we place too much emphasis (or hope) on political systems. Even bad ideas will work fine with the right mix of people, good ideas will fail ...

<t>mikeinie;831380 wrote: <br/>
<br/>
I would love to engage in debate with you, but the stats indicate that it would not have the time. <br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
You haven't made one relevant statement in this thread. You just make excuses indicating a complete unawareness of the subject ...

Bryn Mawr;831086 wrote: :yh_rotfl

No one is likely to discuss anything with you given your attitude.


That sounds like an excuse for not being up to discussing relevant facts.

CARLA;831056 wrote: Are HUMANS end of story. :rolleyes:


The end is not in sight.

<t>Bryn Mawr;831025 wrote: And no-one has any obligation to read your posts at all if they're going to be insulted.<br/>
<br/>
Posts such as "Your preconceived notions have nothing to do with reality. ............. you might have gotten a clue. But you didn't and you don't." do nothing to advancing ...

<t>mikeinie;830733 wrote: I did not know that there was a pre-requisite to replying to this post that required going through your other posts first prior to replying, and you made no reference within this post that it was require to read your other posts first. <br/>
<br/>
Good example of anarchy ...

<t>mikeinie;830169 wrote: <br/>
<br/>
The problem with anarchist is that they offer no solution, what replaces the void they have left once they tear apart society?? History indicates the gap gets filled with some military dictatorship.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Your preconceived notions have nothing to ...

<t>Why do so many people object to, or at least, shy away from discussions about anarchy as an alternative to the immorality of "states".<br/>
<br/>
Patterns arise in every state: they achieve the subjugation of the masses under the control of the rich and powerful. War is routine. Tyranny runs ...

<t>rjwould;827646 wrote: I'm really not interested in your entire manifesto.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Do you care about the future of the human race? <br/>
<br/>
rjwould;827646 wrote: I am asking a simple question, which is; what do you offer as a safety net against murderers, rapists and thieves?<br ...

<t>rjwould;827555 wrote: So, you agree there should be no laws whatsoever, not even to protect pattens and corporate secrets?<br/>
<br/>
Please define 'central government'.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Central governments enact and enforce "laws" (actually legislative opinions) subjugating entire populations ...

<t>coberst;827392 wrote: Where do you live?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Your question is a non sequitur. I "advocate Market Anarchism" does not mean I live in an anarchal society.<br/>
<br/>
All governments are immoral in that they enforce the opinions of their "officials" on citizens at the point of a gun ...

<t>First, I am an activist for Market Anarchism which merely is the logical application of the moral premise that the initiation of the use of force is wrong.<br/>
<br/>
In a free anarchal society the power to control others does not exist. Purchasing power and the power to influence others finds ...

Conspiracy: A plot by one group against another group.

That pretty much describes the workings of government.

<t>coberst;825444 wrote: My solution is that the general level of intellectual sophistication of the population is necessary if our species is to survive. Do you have any interest in this matter?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Understanding the basic nature of ourselves and our environment is required as a ...

<t>When an action is termed immoral a common reply is "According to who's morality?" IMO there is only one morality which anyone can determine scientifically, independent of anyone's opinion. Below is an article which explains the science of morality.<br/>
<br/>
The Relative Goodness of God <br ...