Freedomain Radio: Hanging By A Thread...

Flagpoles, Lifeboats and the Edge of Ethics - dealing with "emergencies," an article by Stefan Molyneux, Host of Freedomain Radio, the most popular philosophy podcast on the web - www.freedomainradio.com

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• freedom
• libertarian
• libertarianism
• politics
• philosophy
• freedomain
• radio
• stefan
• molyneux
• property
• rights
• morality

[Ape65]

All social relations and all property is ultimately based on real or implicit violence. Violence is the unavoidable evil at the heart of society. The purpose of government and the rule of law is to reduce violence to a minimum by ritualising it. Thinking that you eliminate violence by eliminating government is profoundly naive, and cutting yourself off from people who understand this is foolish.

As to the flagpole guy, saving a life trumps any property rights - end of argument.

[stefbot]

Actually, you're not making an argument, so of course it never started.

[adorianvlad]

Ape65, what do you mean by "ritualizing it"?

I also don't have a good grasp on a government-free society concept, considering that everything in this world has a hierarchical structure. Humans NEED a model, a "hero" even to follow, they NEED a near future objective on a large scale, with a common goal, such as, let's say, Irak wants to become a democracy, or humans want to send a man on planet Mars, or they are looking forward for the next Olympics. What would replace such common objectives?

[Ape65]

I was thinking of an idea from Konrad Lorenz's book "On Agression". He points out that carnivores often have an instinctive taboo against fighting each other, so settle disputes by a ritualistic display of strength. Humans lack this instinct (which is why we are one of the few animals to kill each other in wars). As cultures progress, arbitrary violence by individuals is progressively suppressed and replaced by legal procedures & state violence is increasingly limited by rules and procedures.

[stefbot]

Do you think that the advanced statist cultures of the west achieved this in, say, the last hundred years, when hundreds of millions of innocents were slaughtered by governments?

[stefbot]

Yeah, sorry, you are probably a most excellent engineer, but you do not understand philosophy at all. Putting a stratement in CAPS does not turn into an argument. Have a look at my 'Intro to Philosophy' series if you'd like to learn more about it! :)

[stefbot]

Yeah, sorry, you are probably a most excellent engineer, but you do not understand philosophy at all. Putting a stratement in CAPS does not turn into an argument. Have a look at my 'Intro to Philosophy' series if you'd like to learn more about it! :)

[Ape65]

I'd like to apologise for the rudeness of my comments. I just re-read them and I realize I must have been in a filthy mood 3 weeks ago.

[Libertarian333]

You can violate the property of others to save your life or the life of another, just know that you'll owe restitution if the owner objects to the use or destruction of their property. If the property is not damaged or destroyed, the owner's unlikely to object quite simply because in anarchy, the freedom of individuals to dissociate is absolute, and so the potential to be ostracized is a major factor to be considered; the "golden rule" is far more important in anarchy than in statist society.

[KidBlondie]

physics envy.. OH MY SCIENCE THAT WAS AMAZING. 

[AlexDerossard]

@Ape65 I've seen dogs fight to the death and this I've not seen this in a orchestrated dogfight match, but in nature.

I've seen a dog kill one of her own puppies,I saved the otherone.

It's know that apes from one tribe fight and kill those from another. Other animals kill inbetween race, it's not just us human. We humans are just better in it than the other animals, as we are better in most things.

[kihjin]

@Ape65 That's interesting. Egocentric is very different from selfishness, your original premise. I accept that egoism is a dominant force in a child's mind. Selfishness, however is a willful intent to deprive others in favor of yourself, requiring the notion of self and other. This is different than self-interest. I do not believe there is a human nature which is innately selfish, perhaps egocentric, but that egoism is not a negative force. Negative forces such as selfishness are learned.

[Ape65]

@kihjin Very young children are egocentric and do not develop a theory of mind until they are at least 3. If you want to learn more, Google "Jean Piaget's theory of cognitive development", and also "Theory of mind".

[kihjin]

@Ape65 What evidence do you have that it is innately? Do you know which gene-sequence is responsible for selfishness? Is an infant selfish on day 1? Day 2? Does an infant even understand the 'self' at day 1? So empathy is learned, why can't selfishness be learned too? Thanks for continuing to cherry pick from my questions, brings a smile to my face.

[Ape65]

@kihjin Yes, they're innately selfish, but develop empathy and learn reciprocity over time as they interact (sometimes violently) with others.

[kihjin]

@Ape65 Are you suggesting that infants are innately selfish, or just that all most infants that you have had experience with are selfish? How do you know what an infant thinks?Are you suggesting that behavior is divorced from parenting? A selfish infant at age 2 is a sign of bad parenting, it is the responsibility of the parents to demonstrate empathy and reciprocity.

[Ape65]

@kihjin Infants tend to be very selfish and think they are the center of the universe. When you put 2 infants together with some toys, they will tend to grab them from each other and fight with each other over the toys. Over time they learn to negotiate, share and play with each other. When people live in societies conflict over resources is inevitable. Civilization is about establishing rules and procedures for avoiding & settling conflicts, but violence is always the root & last resort.

[kihjin]

@Ape65 Two 2-year-olds raised by modern parent(s)? Or two 2-year-olds raised by compassionate, empathetic, reciprocating, negotiating, non-violence, non-yelling parents? A 2-year-old today is not raised by virtuous parents, and probably wasn't even raised by both parents, or either of them (daycare). You're claiming that there is a basic human nature which is violent and evil. While I do believe human nature exists, it can go either way, good or bad, depending on parenting. Violence is an effect

[Ape65]

@grumpone Let two 2-yr olds play together with some toys, and the violence is obvious. Over time, kids learn to negociate, and by the time you're an adult violence is exceedingly rare, usually implicit or ritualised. However it is never absent, and is always a last resort.