Truth, Virtue, Goodness, Guns - A Philosophical Debate

hi res: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKHP5gtnBAE&fmt=18
An Objectivist and Anarchist video throwdown...

http://www.freedomainradio.com
http://www.youtube.com/user/qtronman

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• anarchism
• anarchist
• debating
• freedomain
• libertarian
• molyneux
• objectivism
• objectivist
• philosophy
• radio
• stefan

[RoulfYelrab]

Both these guys are very bad at rational thinking, and coherent debating.

[stefbot]

haha,

[stefbot]

haha, you mean compared to someone who thinks that "very bad" is some kind of rebuttal?

[djangothecat]

stefbot is better at debating and stating his point than qtron but stefbot is wrong.

[stefbot]

It seems silly to debate now when all you have to do is say it! :)

[djangothecat]

Huh? I'm not sure what you meant by that. But, I've seen your videos and qtron's and I am an Objectivist. I was a little disappointed in qtron's defence of the theory of concepts and government. I looked in the Ayn Rand Lexicon and he could have read straight from it and made a better point. Also, use of force in Ayn Rand's view is not a 'proper' function of government. The proper role of government is to protect man's rights, which means: to protect him from physical violence. -see lexicon

[stefbot]

I was an objectivist for 20 years, I do understand Rand's position on these matters, it's just that the 'proper' role of government requires the initiation of force, to prevent peaceful competition...

[sakanem1]

wow, poor fellow on the left got slaughtered

[HappyWithWhatsThere]

Somebody forgot to read wittgenstein...

[passerby26]

@Sam26100 Who is to say this must all happen in the U.S. first? Let's suppose it did. If China is still a serious threat, there is nothing prohibiting a DRO (or multiple DROs) from stockpiling weapons and armies to defend people if people voluntarily choose that. Even if none of that were true, are you saying we should all pursue violence because other people will always be violent? What is the alternative?

[passerby26]

@charged220 "Logically, are money and force not equally evil?"

The difference is that money in an anarchic society is voluntary exchange, whereas force is not. Moreover, entering into a voluntary contract with a DRO that stipulates that your bank may transfer your funds to the damaged party if you are found guilty also does not include force. Indeed, money and force in a free society are completely different.

[thoughtfultheo]

my debate is betta

[chernetgirma]

RoulfYelrab is totally right these guys are all over the place

[TheDeclanMillar]

These guys are very enthusiastic thinkers :)

[TerrierBram]

@RoulfYelrab “Rational thinking” … now take a while to think about that phrase ...

[datdude212]

@TribeOfNirvana Would you please explain to me what is contradictory about anarchy.

[MKeyserSoze]

Wow, straight for the throat, crushed him at the 2:00 mark. I don't even know why he bothered to go on, there is no refuting this point...

[charged220]

How is a the bank solution more moral than the government solution? The two institutions are both made up concepts, one having a monopoly on money, the other on force.

Force and money aren't distinct physical manifestations. Both are morally wrong, because both money and force are enslavement. Logically, If there was no money in society the government wouldn't tax you. And if there was no taxation, the government would abolish money.

Logically, are money and force not equally evil?