Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: In a city within a state where politicians come to get their PHDs in Corruption
2,907 posts, read 2,067,707 times
Reputation: 4478
Advertisements
[quote=sonetlumiere;52284244]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Paolella
Ah yes, libertarianism's fatal flaw: presuming all human action (I actually read the Von Mises book of the same name FWIW) is is rooted in reason.
Correction, libertarianism is rooted in self-interest. Even those among us who appear to be entirely unselfish, they do what they do for their own benefit. Now, those interests might not be materialistic or tangible, but they are self-serving.
Also presuming all human action is based on righteousness and conscience.
In reality, I see liberterianism preaching "selfishness is good" (Ayn Rand).
Which it is. Selfishness, the desire for one's life to be the primary value and the target for behaviors that encourage flourishing and happiness, is a noble standard. And far superior to selflessness. Selflessness really doesn't exist, and would be evil if it did.
Which it is. Selfishness, the desire for one's life to be the primary value and the target for behaviors that encourage flourishing and happiness, is a noble standard.
Which you cannot differentiate between self interest and narcissism and sociopathy.
If you had the chance to earn an $50,000 by making sure 500 people die in a blast because you substituted shoddy materials during construction in a power plant, your viewpoint applauds that.
If you would hurt people to get your way, your viewpoint applauds that.
Quote:
And far superior to selflessness. Selflessness really doesn't exist, and would be evil if it did.
So you believe Mother Theresa is evil. Those who do volunteer work serving poor people in soup kitchens are evil to you. Volunteers at a homeless shelter are evil people to you.
I saw this when I worked in the grocery business. The store managers were always under pressure to reduce payroll. And one way of doing this was to try to fire the older and slower, more expensive workers and replace them with minimum wagers.
That's why I find it annoying when there is a discussion to raise the retirement age. It's quite possible for "retirement" to come far earlier than the full retirement age. And it really does not matter what industry you are in.
You hit the nail on the head. Getting a job after fifty is hell.
The people who want to raise the retirement age for Social Security purposely have their head in the sand when it comes to the sheer number who are forced out of the job market permanently at 53 or something close to that.
Age prejudice is actively practiced. Layoffs get rid of an equal number of people over and under 40 to avoid law suits. People under and near 40 find jobs quickly. People who are visibly over 45 have a much rougher time. Most people who are unaffected by this still don't believe that a person over 50 can easily be unemployed for over a year.
Which you cannot differentiate between self interest and narcissism and sociopathy.
If you had the chance to earn an $50,000 by making sure 500 people die in a blast because you substituted shoddy materials during construction in a power plant, your viewpoint applauds that.
If you would hurt people to get your way, your viewpoint applauds that.
So you believe Mother Theresa is evil. Those who do volunteer work serving poor people in soup kitchens are evil to you. Volunteers at a homeless shelter are evil people to you.
What a warped viewpoint.
Oh brother. Do you people see what I have to put up with? I'm the saint. Not Mother Theresa. I'm the saint for having to deal with vacuous posts from Hell.
Mother Theresa was evil. Hers was a philosophy of death and human despair, destruction, failure, and misery. Sacrifice for sacrifice's sake. Disgusting, disgracia! She was a despicable woman, and it is not surprising she got the Academy Award from the Pope, who has been the CEO of the corporation that shields child molesters for decade after decade. They deserve each other.
Precisely. Your philosophy is that of sociopaths, narcissists, predators and criminals.
Quote:
Hers was a philosophy of death and human despair, destruction, failure, and misery.
No, that's your philosophy.
You believe it is OK to hurt other people so that you can benefit from it.
Your role model is the CEO who jacked up the price of epi-pens 700% so he could get a bigger bonus check. If people die or go bankrupt, you don't care.
I'm surprised you don't look up to sexual abusers, they're the same kind of sociopaths that you idolize - use power over people and hurt them to benefit from them.
But then again, double standards are just proof of corruption.
They're also narcissists and sociopaths too. But I wasn't going there, because of godwin's law.
So what's your point?
You believe in hurting people for your gain. That's not a good philosophy.
Good philosophy is philosophy that promotes human flourishing. The ethics of self-sacrifice and altruism is destructive of human flourishing. Selflessness is not only inherently evil, it is dishonest. All charitable acts are selfish, and should be selfish. Selfish is good.
The correct path is one of rational egoism, and it is described in more detail in the link below. It is a fantastic philosophy for conducting a person's one and only period of existence, or what we refer to as life.
We can stop with the ad hominems at this point. They are fun, of course, but don't advance the argument.
The bottom line is freedom of association is as essential as freedom of speech. We each need total control of who we decide to associate with, and concomitantly, who we decide to reject. It is not a matter for the State, it is a personal issue, a personal right, and should not be infringed by the State in any way, shape, or form. Will some people exercise that right irrationally? Yes, but too bad. People who act irrationally in a rights-respecting society will usually end up self-destructing and failing.
Good philosophy is philosophy that promotes human flourishing.
So how do humans flourish when their epi pen price is jacked up 700%? You approve of that.
How do humans flourish when CEOs screw up and then punish the rank and file through layoffs? How are the laid off people flourishing?
This is your philosophy doing this.
Quote:
We can stop with the ad hominems at this point. They are fun, of course, but don't advance the argument.
I was attacking your point, not you. You believe it is OK to hurt others so you can benefit. How does hurting others so you can flourish helps others flourish?
It doesn't. Ayn Rand's philosophy is a logical contradiction and is not rational.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
