While I appreciate the Philosophy of Liberty, a cursory examination of the reality of culture, civilization and all aspects of post-modern life (as well as all prior political eras leading to it) at once refutes this worldview and render it wishful thinking at best. The philosophy rests in part on the premise that man, or collective Man, can somehow consistently muster enough good will not to act selfishly, not to initiate harm, not to forcefully respond to attacks on liberty, etc. etc. This ignores the time proven, time tested, historcially verifiable fact that this is not "in" the nature of man, and nor is it likely ever to be. How can a philosophy that rests so squarely on such a flawed assumption satisfy any meaningful questions of existence? (Which is ultimately what this philosophy is trying to do - it seeks to give people with the same collective conscience a framing system through which to answer the true questions of existence.) Which, if anyone is truly interested, I would be happy to post the answers to.
Cool. I have anonymous readers. I'm thinking about writing a philosophical post about "ideal worlds", and what, if anything, we can learn from this kind of reasoning.
Libertarianism doesn't require that people not be selfish. In fact, it tends to assume that they *will* be. The assumption is that all relationships are reciprocal (approximately "all action causes a reaction"). And yes, it is flawed, but the philosophy is still the source of many good ideas. It provides a "sensible default", as candid put it.
I would like to hear your answers to the "true questions of existence".
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
gusl![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
gustavolacerda.livejournal.com - Re: Wishful Thinking
Wishful Thinking
Date: 2003-04-14 08:23 am (UTC)Re: Wishful Thinking
Date: 2003-04-14 04:52 pm (UTC)I'm thinking about writing a philosophical post about "ideal worlds", and what, if anything, we can learn from this kind of reasoning.
Libertarianism doesn't require that people not be selfish. In fact, it tends to assume that they *will* be. The assumption is that all relationships are reciprocal (approximately "all action causes a reaction"). And yes, it is flawed, but the philosophy is still the source of many good ideas. It provides a "sensible default", as
I would like to hear your answers to the "true questions of existence".