-
[quote user="Foozle"]Edit: my font went a little crazy, didn't mean to do that should be all the same size.[/quote]Yeah, the post editor has problems with pasted-in text. I usually paste things in Notepad, copy them out, and paste that here. [quote user="Foozle"]I accept all of them intellectually, but don’t exactly accept
-
[quote user="Foozle"]Mr. C I strongly believe the big theme around here is telling people to fight the state balls to the wall any way you feel is the most effective. I don’t believe it matters where you start as long as your real desire is to get rid of the state because if that is your goal, you will move on from the political when
-
[quote user="Stefan Molyneux"]That is how you 'fight' governments. If you haven't understood that as yet mr c, after so many years, you don't get it at all.[/quote]No, I understand what you say on that quite well. I was clarifying that for the guy, whose posts indicate he's not to that level of understanding yet (though
-
[quote user="Joseito"]verifiable by whom?? [/quote]Me, brain scans of the future, people who can read body language, people who read diaries, people who listen to what people say about their wants. I mean, a lot of theft is not verifiable. It's still, I would presume, wrong. Also, I have a lot of wants that I don't want, so to speak
-
[quote user="Joseito"]The objectively required (universal) goal of "trying to murder" is trying to murder. The moment you add "if I want" you are obviously not talking about objectivity anymore[/quote]I'm not sure why that's not objective. Maybe I have the wrong definition. I can certainly observe whether I want
-
[quote user="Joseito"]I am sorry you felt affected, but it was the OP's argument I was laughing at. I do not think you lack intellectual honesty.[/quote]Oh, I see. [quote user="Joseito"]You didn't originate that "moral theory" either, but you were referring to it when you criticised my laughing response to it.[
-
[quote user="Arius"]That is, no compelling argument for one person adopting the arbitrary preferences of another could be won by arbitrary preference.[/quote]Right, but that's a confusion. You can, of course, attempt to say "My personal preferences are better, you moron!" Sure. If you do that, then Stef's arguments are quite
-
[quote user="Joseito"]I don't think you got what I meant. It is astounding and laughable that people propose things like that as moral theories when they present them, with complete lack of intellectual humility, as a "proof that UPB has been debunked" [/quote]You quoted me, and I'm not saying that.
-
[quote user="Joseito"]You cannot base a moral theory on the subjectivity of "if I want", because that is detaching the individual from the universal concept of moral actors.[/quote]OK, why are preferences (what people want) talked about so much in the book? There must be some other reason to include them if it's not because the
-
[quote user="Joseito"]and THAT is suppose to be in the same category of moral theory as the non-initiation of force! [/quote]Apparently when the repeated criticism over years is that the definitions aren't at all clear (and no clear definitions are given, just an appeal to the dictionary the people presumably already had), it's just