[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 40 KB, 400x400, stefavatar_400x400.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5604573 No.5604573 [Reply] [Original]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-rIkAOHPBg

>> No.5604598

>>5604573

This guy seriously makes me question what qualifies someone to be a philosopher.

Those who do tend to parade around that epithet mostly are.

He's just a gilded Joe Rogan.

>> No.5604612

Lel even joe's not having it

>> No.5604613

As an "anarcho-capitalist" (which I recognize is not anarchist, its simply the most convenient label) it really pains me watch Stef destroy himself.

>the capacity to evaluate new information and have it change our ideals

Oh dear. This is progressive-tier drivel.

>> No.5604614

>>5604573
gilded by what

>> No.5604622

>>5604613

>As an "anarcho-capitalist"

Stopped reading there.

>> No.5604624

What's he talking about? I argue with my computer all the time

>> No.5604630

>u dont talk with rocks so dat means we r special beings gifted with voluntaryist magix

>> No.5604636

>>5604622

You know, that's all I ever get. People are rightly fearful about engaging in debate with us, because we refuse to enter the realm of abstractions and relativism. I take this as an admission people know we're right, but fear the truth within themselves.

>> No.5604641

>>5604636

I'm not fearful.
Go ahead.

If anarcho-capitalism works, why do you need cops?

>> No.5604655

>>5604641

You don't need police. Police are completely unnecessary and completely indistinguishable from thugs who enforce the local warlords reign. What you do want (not need), is people who negotiate interactions between individuals and record contracts. The reason for this is not that people are evil or stupid and so need to be kept in line, its that as the complexity and scale of human activity increases, third parties must arise to keep track of and direct it.

>> No.5604675

>>5604636

But there's no meaningful conversation to be had with you guys.

This whole 'philosophy' of yours insists that “the could be" is a useful category for describing daily life and the market that socially organizes it.
You're not capable of having a discussion about the present and choose to misrepresent the past.

>> No.5604699

>>5604675

I would hardly call it a philosophy. Its about principles drawn up from philosophy. Centrally, the concept of appropriation, and from that the NAP. There's no will or grand plan involved. Its about following the NAP yourself as an individual, and judging others by it. Attached to that is the concept that there is a real, physical world we can know.

>> No.5604701

>>5604655
What happens if two private defense agencies cannot settle on a third party private court to resolve their dispute? How would this end in anything other than bloodshed and what would stop it happening often?

>> No.5604706

>>5604636

>because we refuse to enter the realm of abstractions and relativism

Isn't libertarian capitalism just one big abstract idea? I mean, you can't refer to concrete reality because it entails you looking at all these starving people and ecological devastation.

>> No.5604720

>>5604706

All of capitalism is based on the abstraction of private property. That's guy's just insane.

>> No.5604725

>>5604573
you cant say sandpaper is the same as every object if you don't use your beard to smoothen wood.

>> No.5604732

>>5604701

In order to have any meaningful object to dispute about they need a common third party to record the interactions pertaining to the object in the first place.

>>5604706

Capitalism is not an abstract idea, no. Its a method of distributing resources. What starving people and ecological devastation? Capitalism has nothing to do with either.

>> No.5604741

>>5604636
Don't flatter yourself.

>> No.5604761

>>5604732

Again this faux nominalist bullshit.

Capitalism cannot be unplugged from history or contemporaneity.

This alone undermines the whole ancap/lolbertarian point of view and ethic, but you're too stubborn/spergshit to get it.

>> No.5604763
File: 17 KB, 217x204, 1405728092036.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5604763

>>5604732

>Capitalism is not an abstract idea, no.

>What starving people and ecological devastation? Capitalism has nothing to do with either.

>> No.5604766

>>5604725
BEARDISM BTFO #REKT

>> No.5604770

>>5604732
>In order to have any meaningful object to dispute about they need a common third party to record the interactions pertaining to the object in the first place.

How is this so? Assuming there would be a whole market of competing private courts, two people who had previously never interacted with each other could easily have a dispute over a car crash, accusation of stolen property or any aggressive dumb encounter that escalates too far. It's easily possible that each party could have a private defense agency which refuse to settle on a private court because of disputes concerning bias toward one side or the other. What happens then?

>> No.5604772

>>5604732

I don't think you know what abstract idea means anon... you can't reach out and touch capitalism but I bet you imagine doing so when you're stroking your cock.

>> No.5604775

>>5604732

>Feudalism is not an abstract idea, no. Its a method of distributing resources. What marriage politics and perpetual war? Feudalism has nothing to do with either.

>> No.5604776

>>5604763
These things have existed under every economic and social system going back to hunter-gatherer times. How is capitalism special?

>> No.5604783
File: 44 KB, 233x234, 1405040546372.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5604783

>>5604776

lmao ever heard of the industrial revolution?

>> No.5604789

>>5604776

Except it didn't.
In hunter-gatherer times you had no ecological disasters or starving people. Just a more dangerous life and a shorter life expectancy.

Unless you base your anthropology on 18th century anecdotes and armchair ethnology, then yeah.

>> No.5604790

>>5604732
>Capitalism is not an abstract idea, no.
I'm holding capitalism right now. It measures 5 inches and purrs lightly. Dubs decide what i'll do with it.

>> No.5604795

>>5604789

Hunter gatherers had a longer life expectancy overall than any other premodern time, I'm pretty sure.

>> No.5604799

>>5604790

Smash it.

>> No.5604801

>>5604741

Actually, I will. Unlike Relativists and Progressives, we actually value ourselves and encourage success, rather than hate it and wish bring people down to our level of misery.

>> No.5604803

>>5604573
disproving determinism is necessary but not sufficient proof of free will

>> No.5604805

>>5604770
The assumption is that these private defense agencies would have agreed upon courts to help settle cases. In any situation, they will prefer to avoid war.

>> No.5604810
File: 2.41 MB, 200x174, nice dubs.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5604810

>>5604799

Full fucking communism

>> No.5604812

>>5604598
Literally no one serious in philosophy would call him a philosopher

>> No.5604814

>>5604799
Omg

>> No.5604815

>>5604803
He didn't even disprove determinism though. It's easy to disprove determinism. Just point to how stochastic phenomena like proton decay, but he just said, "Muh argumentation."

>> No.5604817
File: 32 KB, 460x276, yes.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5604817

>>5604799
hahaha

>> No.5604821

>>5604761

Are you saying that abstractions exist? They don't exist as anything except the communications of neurons inside our brains.

>> No.5604829

>>5604815
>It's easy to disprove determinism. Just point to how stochastic phenomena

This isn't a proof of fundamental randomness. There's also the "hidden variables" explanation which would leave the universe deterministic.

>> No.5604831

>>5604805

>In any situation, they will prefer to avoid war.

Modern history should've taught you a little something about that, anon...

>> No.5604834

>>5604790
take a steaming shit on it.

>> No.5604840

>>5604821

>Are you saying that abstractions exist? They don't exist as anything except the communications of neurons inside our brains.

ooooh god this is getting better and better

here's a hint, kid: when you think about "the communications of neurons inside our brains" it's an abstraction

>> No.5604843

>>5604829
>There's also the "hidden variables" explanation which would leave the universe deterministic.
If there are hidden variables, then it isn't stochastic, it's just unknown in cause. Stochastic phenomena are, by definition, unexplainable. Some disciplines abuse this; but, at least with physics, when a phenomenon is understood as stochastic, it means that you cannot explain it ever.

>> No.5604852

>>5604831
>Modern history should've taught you a little something about that, anon...
What? Wars in modern history are created by states and private industries involved in war rely on government contracts. Identify modern history as a history of nation-states. Don't just strawman ancaps.

>> No.5604858

>>5604770

They communicate until justice is served. Prison should not exist if courts are using the NAP, law is voluntary. Of course, if you go around driving recklessly, stealing things and killing people, once you are identified you will lose the privilege of cooperation from vendors and third parties, and in the case of killing people without turning yourself in, you will be hunted down and terminated.

>> No.5604859

>>5604821
>denies the existence of abstract objects
>accepts they are "inside" of our brains

Watching wannabe physicalists argue this awkwardly = one of the biggest guilty pleasures in life.

>> No.5604864

>>5604772

You can't reach out and touch capitalism, but you can do what it describes. In the same way "tulip" refers to a real, observable plant, "capitalism" describes a real, observable phenomena.

>> No.5604866
File: 43 KB, 389x500, 1389748318805.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5604866

>>5604852

>Wars in modern history are created by states

Yes, but what causes them?

>> No.5604867

>>5604801
Yes because that's the only kind of flattery you get.

It's okay, everybody needs praise in one form or another.

>> No.5604870

>>5604789

>no ecological disasters

Ever heard of the Holocene extinction event?

>> No.5604872

>>5604843
We don't understand the world well enough to make that claim. We can't say whether anything in the universe is deterministic or stochastic because we don't know everything in the universe. Sorry, you can't disprove determinism this way.

Even then, ultimately stochasticism is an EPISTEMOLOGICAL problem, because a variable could exist that would be impossible for us to sense.

>> No.5604873

>>5604790

You're not holding it, but you're enacting it.

>> No.5604878

>>5604840

No, it isn't. Its a real, observable phenomena that takes place within our brains.

>> No.5604882

>>5604864

>being this metaphysically confused

no, anon, an economic system is not as concrete as a tulip

>> No.5604884

>>5604859

I'm not arguing, simply describing reality.

>> No.5604888

>>5604882

Yes, it is. Its like saying the winds don't exist, or the dawn does not exist.

>> No.5604889

>>5604866
States. They explicitly cause them by having power struggles. If there were no states, you wouldn't have these large scale wars. Hell, the bloodiest wars happened during the nation-state period for two main reasons: Dramatic Population Increase and the Industrial Revolution (enabling states to more effectively communicate, travel, and kill people).


Ireland never had a state before it was conquered. It had government-like entities that were essentially tribes that you could join/leave whenever you wanted. Iceland had some polylegal society where you could choose the legal system you wanted. These societies did not have large armies because it was costly and inefficient when compared to more peaceful means of arbitration. There was no oligarchy to control an entire nation's worth of resources. That's why they got raped so fast by other states. If stateless societies could create wars, then there would still be a few left in the world.

>> No.5604891

>>5604878

You actually cannot even comprehend what I just told you, kek.

>> No.5604892

>>5604636
>People are rightly fearful about engaging in debate with u
No they aren't, it's just that it's unfulfilling. You're the economic equivalent of creationists, no one with a brain argues with creationists.

>> No.5604896

>>5604888

No, anon, an economic system is not as concrete as the wind or the dawn.

Wanna keep going? You may eventually find a good comparison.

>> No.5604903

>>5604891

I can, and I know you take me for a fool, trying to draw me into relativist arguments. I simply refuse to have a discussion under your terms.

>> No.5604904

>>5604872
>We don't understand the world well enough to make that claim.
Scientists don't say they don't have a cause, it's just that they don't exist within the natural universe. This isn't a knowledge problem of known unknowns or unknown unknowns, fundamental theories of quantum physics pretty much state that they have to appear without any natural reason. I'm no physicist, so you'll have to take it up with them.

>Even then, ultimately stochasticism is an EPISTEMOLOGICAL problem, because a variable could exist that would be impossible for us to sense.
You're stepping on empirical toes.

>> No.5604909

>>5604896

Yes, it is. Economics systems are entropy. It describes the method humans go about taking materials from their original place, and then distributing them among themselves. Denying the existence of economic systems is like denying the laws of physics exist.

>> No.5604912

>>5604903

Relativism? lmao baby just learned a new philosophy buzzword

Trying to teach you the basic philosophical definition of abstract idea is not very relativistic. Though I guess it makes sense that someone functioning on the mental level of an ancap would have boogiemen like this.

>> No.5604923
File: 28 KB, 337x294, 1383700729823.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5604923

>>5604909

>Yes, it is. Economics systems are entropy. It describes the method humans go about taking materials from their original place, and then distributing them among themselves.

see image

>Denying the existence of economic systems is like denying the laws of physics exist.

Hate to be the guy to ruin your religion, but the laws of physics are abstractions.

>> No.5604924

>>5604912

There's only two kinds of ideologies; mine, which seeks to know the truth by observing reality, and yours, which seeks to fog reality to justify their politics.

>> No.5604925

>>5604904
>Scientists don't say they don't have a cause, it's just that they don't exist within the natural universe.
They fucking disagree and "scientists" isn't an authority on everything you dunce. What do you think the whole debate between Niels Bohr, Heisenberg and Einstein was about? Jesus dude

>This isn't a knowledge problem of known unknowns or unknown unknowns, fundamental theories of quantum physics pretty much state that they have to appear without any natural reason.
AS FAR AS WE CAN TELL. THIS DOES NOT DESCRIBE WHAT IS FUNDAMENTALLY HAPPENING, JUST THE LIMITS OF WHAT WE CAN SEE ARE HAPPENING. EPISTEMOLOGICAL ISSUES ARE NOT ONTOLOGICAL ISSUES.

>You're stepping on empirical toes.
You're being an idiot

>> No.5604926

>>5604923
>see image
Spontaneous order, duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude.

>> No.5604930

>>5604923

No, they're not. They're descriptions of reality. That's not an abstraction. Also, economics is literally the human role in entropy.

>> No.5604931

>>5604924

This is so ironic I can't tell if you're the same guy or someone pretending to be him to make fun of him, or both and this is just a hilarious piece of performance art.

Fucking bravo, anon.

>> No.5604935

>>5604930

A description of reality is an abstraction.

>> No.5604939

>>5604655
if a billionaire buys the mona lisa should he be allowed to burn it

>> No.5604944

>>5604931

Thank you, laughter is a reaction to a novel experience. Perhaps someday you will see the light and see it as more than novelty.

>> No.5604945

A make fun of Molyneux thread? This should be fu- ... oh

>> No.5604946
File: 64 KB, 538x482, 1385175518629.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5604946

>>5604924

>There's only two kinds of ideologies; mine, which seeks to know the truth by observing reality, and yours, which seeks to fog reality to justify their politics.


>this was written by an anarcho-capitalist

jesus christ lol

>> No.5604948

>>5604925
>They fucking disagree and "scientists" isn't an authority on everything you dunce.
No they don't.

>What do you think the whole debate between Niels Bohr, Heisenberg and Einstein was about? Jesus dude
Yeah and Einstein lost.

>AS FAR AS WE CAN TELL. THIS DOES NOT DESCRIBE WHAT IS FUNDAMENTALLY HAPPENING, JUST THE LIMITS OF WHAT WE CAN SEE ARE HAPPENING.
Stop yelling, you autistic manchild. I get that you watched a BBC documentary made 40+ years ago, but you don't have to spazz out. I get that the act of observing potentially biasing an experiment blows your mind, but this isn't anything too fundamentally new.

>EPISTEMOLOGICAL ISSUES ARE NOT ONTOLOGICAL ISSUES.
I never said they were. I'm saying there aren't epistemological issues.

>You're being an idiot
Says the kid typing all caps like he takes coffee enemas 5 times daily.

>> No.5604950

>>5604930

>Also, economics is literally the human role in entropy.

It was funny because you literally pulled it out of your ass in an unrelated discussion to sound scientific.

>> No.5604951

>>5604935

No its not, its a description. I know all the bullshit about an abstraction being the distilled idea or meaning of something, but that's just a description, making the term abstraction useless for this purpose. So I reject it.

>> No.5604953

>>5604946

None of my politics require force, so I don't need to justify anything.

>> No.5604958

>>5604951

>I know you were right this whole argument, but my feelings mean that I'm still right

ancaps, ladies and gentlemen. top kek.

>> No.5604959

>>5604953
if a billionaire buys the mona lisa should he be allowed to burn it

>> No.5604962

>>5604948
There's nothing to debate anymore. If you want to claim that the distinction bears no meaning, argue that, but there is a distinction. It doesn't matter whatever delusional authority you've created to "prove" you're right.

You're not even understanding my argument. Whether we can "know" the actual causes for certain events is one issue. If we have NO WAY of knowing the causes, then the item will seem fundamentally random. BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THERE ISN'T CAUSE. It's not even a point of debate, it's true by definition. The fact that you keep arguing against this is just you being fucking stupid. There's nothing to say.

>> No.5604965

>>5604950

No, I didn't. Just as the mold breaks down the mountain dew in your basement to give each mold its equal share of sugar, so to do we break down precious metals, food and resources to give each man his share of the world.

>> No.5604970

>>5604573

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auQJMLWx6og&

He BTFO John Stewart and "white privilege" bullshit in this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auQJMLWx6og&

>> No.5604971

>>5604958

Not really, you just don't understand.

>> No.5604974

>>5604965

My point went way over your head.

>> No.5604982

>>5604962
I'm pretty much arguing that the extent of our senses is reality. There are no epistemological problems.

>If we have NO WAY of knowing the causes, then the item will seem fundamentally random. BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THERE ISN'T CAUSE
What do you mean, "There is a cause?" Language can only describe the limits of our senses, our reality. To say that something has a cause and isn't observable is silly. There are no genuine philosophical problems here. You are only creating a linguistic problem.

>> No.5604983

>>5604959

Yes, you should.

>> No.5604984

>>5604971

You know that you were wrong about what abstraction really means but because this abstraction is a description you don't think it matters that it's an abstraction so you won't count it as one. It's batshit and it's your life.

>> No.5604991
File: 94 KB, 789x805, 1324065705025.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5604991

>>5604970

really fucken well argued and caused me to subscribe to him, even though i disagree with a lot of his shit

>> No.5605005
File: 103 KB, 500x500, 1413242395944.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5605005

>this thread

>> No.5605009

Anyone who constantly proclaims to have THE TRUTH is usually an idiot

>> No.5605010

Out of all the libertarian/classical liberal authors why are Rand and Molyneux the only ones that get any kind of discussion?

>> No.5605013

>>5604982
>I'm pretty much arguing that the extent of our senses is reality. There are no epistemological problems.

Okay, then you should have SAID this. I still disagree that there's no distinction between what's in our heads and what's going on around them.

>What do you mean, "There is a cause?"

Maybe there is an undiscovered particle who's interaction is causing the event, which will be discovered in five years. It's silly to me to say "the particle doesn't exist until it's found". No, quantum events were happening before we knew the atom existed. Until we have looked at literally EVERYTHING that exists, we can't say what is and what isn't truly random. This should be obvious.

>Language can only describe the limits of our senses, our reality.

Did you forget what imagination is?

>To say that something has a cause and isn't observable is silly.

Not necessarily that it isn't observable, that it hasn't been observed yet is also sufficient condition for what I'm saying. The issue is you keep acting like physicists today somehow "know" what the limits are, and I'm telling you it's fucking retarded to think we have that kind of knowledge about quantum events.

>There are no genuine philosophical problems here. You are only creating a linguistic problem.

No, you're just not thinking about the problem in your own views.

>> No.5605019

>>5604991
>right wingers are this stupid

>> No.5605022

>>5605010

Because they're unafraid to stand above the fools and let themselves be counted.They also represent the tragic and lonely struggle of being the only moral person in a world of violence and oppression.

>> No.5605024

>>5605010
because they are little babby shits that let the people who like them indulge in oversimplifying everything into little basics like muh freedoms instead of actually thinking

>> No.5605025

>>5605009
anyone who gets stuck on pedantic 'there is no truth' arguments beyond purely phlisophical discussions is usually an idiot

>> No.5605026

>>5604858
>once you are identified you will lose the privilege of cooperation from vendors and third parties, and in the case of killing people without turning yourself in, you will be hunted down and terminated.
By whom?

>> No.5605027
File: 10 KB, 234x204, 4063456e4721c0b892b371336daf9369.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5605027

>>5604655
YEAH BRO FUCK THE POLICE

>> No.5605028

>>5605013
>Okay, then you should have SAID this. I still disagree that there's no distinction between what's in our heads and what's going on around them.
That's what I said. There are no epistemological problems. My position has nto changed.

>Maybe there is an undiscovered particle who's interaction is causing the event
No, I mean as a linguistic exercise. What do you mean by, "A cause?" How do you come about to the understanding of a cause? Making empirical claims about something non observable is like drinking a Tuesday.

>Did you forget what imagination is?
Did you forget who Wittgenstein is?

>Not necessarily that it isn't observable, that it hasn't been observed yet is also sufficient condition for what I'm saying.
Einstein was
WRONG
R
O
N
G

>No, you're just not thinking about the problem in your own views.
That doesn't even make sense.

>> No.5605032

>>5605010
Because all the others are well respected like Nozick.

>> No.5605035

>>5604884
Where do ideas come from?

>> No.5605036

>>5605027

Actually, I loathe blacks and their "culture", especially urban culture. I would never desecrate my body with disgusting tattoos.

>> No.5605041

>>5605025
ok

>> No.5605042

>>5604889
>by having power struggles
What if two private militias had a power struggle?

>> No.5605044

>>5605028
>That's what I said. There are no epistemological problems. My position has nto changed.
Okay, you just don't know what the fuck you're talking about. The disparity between what we know and what is real IS LITERALLY WHAT EPISTEMOLOGY STUDIES.

>No, I mean as a linguistic exercise. What do you mean by, "A cause?" How do you come about to the understanding of a cause? Making empirical claims about something non observable is like drinking a Tuesday.

You already know what cause is. Are you trying to get to the Humean is-ought problem? Sure, no causation, let's go with that. Since you don't believe in causation at all, then you completely disagree with the scientists you're using to back up your argument of fundamental randomness, and thus you're proving your initial argument incoherent.

The rest of your post is just incoherent. I'm done replying to you. You're not even smart enough to have an educated debate about this subject.

>> No.5605048

>>5604953
Why is force bad?
you're spooking the place up

>> No.5605050

>>5605042

This is a fundamental misunderstanding. There would be no "private armies", violence is immoral under the NAP. They would be agencies that seek reparation and if you don't adhere they deny services to you.

>> No.5605052

>>5605044
>Okay, you just don't know what the fuck you're talking about. The disparity between what we know and what is real IS LITERALLY WHAT EPISTEMOLOGY STUDIES.
And I'm saying that there are no epistemological problems, only linguistic problems.

>You already know what cause is. Are you trying to get to the Humean is-ought problem?
No, I'm trying to get you to the "limits of language" problem. Shit nigger, read some Wittgenstein or Russell or something.

>You're not even smart enough to have an educated debate about this subject.
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one cannot remain silent.

>> No.5605053

>>5605048

Because it accelerates the Universe to its inevitable end through destruction (increasing entropy).

>> No.5605055

>>5604983
Can I buy the atmosphere? If so, can I destroy it? If so again, why isn't that an act of aggression to every living thing on the planet?

>> No.5605059

>>5604573
>there are people on /lit/ right now that serious think he's wrong

>> No.5605062

>>5605053
lmao every time people attempt to found a moral argument based on entropy

just

lmao

>> No.5605066

>>5605036
Are fanny packs degenerate?

>> No.5605069

>>5605052
I already know the limits of language. You don't even understand Wittgenstein and it's obvious that you've just read some short summary and now think you're the cleverest fucking shithead to ever browse 4chan

Go think about your views more and stop posting, it's embarrassing.

>> No.5605073

>>5605050
>agencies that seek reparation
sounds a lot like the guns of the state

>> No.5605078

>>5605069
>You don't even understand Wittgenstein and it's obvious that you've just read some short summary and now think you're the cleverest fucking shithead to ever browse 4chan
Or in other words:
>I fail at both philosophy and science, so I better call him a shitposter.

Go back to reading George Orwell or whatever you Polisci fucks do.

>> No.5605085
File: 113 KB, 580x412, cultural revolution best day of my life.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5605085

>>5604799
FUCKING
DYING

THIS DO THIS

>> No.5605094

>>5605066

No. Degeneracy is a fascist buzzword. They're just stupid.

>> No.5605099

>>5605073

No, that's violence. Also, you must opt into these agencies. You can live lawlessly if you wish, its just that an ancap society would make that life impossible.

>> No.5605256

>>5604573
So we've got free will but we're not free to decide what we want?

>> No.5605266

Oh god I remember this.

How fucking embarrassing.

>> No.5605275

>>5605099
So it is okay to initiate force, but only if you have a contract. This is very reasonable. But tell me, my friend, how do these agencies receive their legitimacy?

>> No.5605277

>>5604636
>abstractions
You do know that "the market" is an abstraction? That it exists only as the aggregate of human economic actions? That it is a (powerful) fiction as illusory as society itself?

>> No.5605286

>>5605275
they decide to be nice guys ;)

>> No.5605300

>>5605275

No, its never OK to initiate force. By "make life impossible" I didn't mean force, I meant denial of services.

>> No.5605304

>>5605005
...is the most entertaining thing to happen in a long time.

>> No.5605325

>>5605300
>the court of Molyneux sentences you, if you're cool with it, to DOS
But really, if you deny someone the services of a society, you are forcing them to live primitively until they die. Have you thought about the implications of what you're saying?

>> No.5605334

>>5604799
This is the sign we've been waiting for

>> No.5605342

>>5605325

Yes. You are not forcing them to live to live primitively, they condemn themselves.

>> No.5605358

>>5605342
So you support death penalties

>> No.5605359
File: 39 KB, 250x407, mad-max.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5605359

What's the difference between libertarian capitalism and the Road Warrior?

>> No.5605364

>>5605342
Answer
>>5605055

>> No.5605374

hey guys this is the weather

what do you wanna know

>> No.5605376

>>5605358

Its not a death penalty.

>>5605055

No, you can't buy the atmosphere.

>> No.5605389

lol it's completely fine to be aggressive as long as you define it in the very specific ways that I define as aggressive

>> No.5605391

>>5605374
why you're going to kill all of us, if capitalism is so great and global warming definitely isn't the result of rampant industrialization and capitalist-induced consumerism.

>> No.5605396

>>5605391
who calm down man this is not really the weather i'm just messing around

>> No.5605399

>>5605376
but you can buy airspace?

>> No.5605403

>>5605376
>Its not a death penalty.
If you aren't allowed to participate in society, you will have to live on your own. You will die alone, and sooner than expected.
>>5605376
Why not? What about an ecosystem? If I own an apartment, can I have it destroyed?

>> No.5605406

>>5605391
dude back off you don't want him to just leave

>> No.5605418

>>5605359
the roads

>> No.5605419

>>5605389
>I define
>I
see, this is the problem.

>> No.5605441

>>5605359
you don't have to pay to use the roads.

>> No.5605443

>>5605418
L M F A O

10/10/10/10

>> No.5605449

>>5605418
>tfw roads are literally a social construct

>> No.5605457

>>5604636
>this is what edgy an-caps actually believe

>> No.5605485

>>5605399

No, you can buy airspace, but you can't "buy" the atmosphere.

>>5605403

If you own the apartment, that implies its already built.

>> No.5605495
File: 1.27 MB, 2475x2570, karte-regionen-demokratische-republik-kongo.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5605495

>>5604636
If anarco-capatilism works so well, then why is the democratic republic of congo so shit, especially in the east?

>> No.5605517

>>5605485
god you're dense
What I'm getting at is can I destroy my property? What if that exercise effectively aggresses on other people or animals? How do you rectify ancap property rights and the NAP

>> No.5605525

>>5604812
He has the most popular philosophy show...

>> No.5605535

>>5604655
That's what police are you fucking idiot.

>> No.5605542

>>5605078

If there is no causality there wouldn't be any possiblity to make abstractions of the phenomena that occurs in the world

You couldn't react to anything that happens ever

>> No.5605557

>>5605525
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RCMzPleoKk
Stop

>> No.5605558

>>5605036

>Anarchist

>Doesn't like degeneracy of nature

Can you actually reason about what you think?

>> No.5605585

>>5604573

>implying that a concept doesn't already implies how can you react to it.

>> No.5605611

>>5605557
>2012
It's nearly 2015 now.

>> No.5605638

This guy is almost enough to make me wish we had more AnCaps on /lit/.

>> No.5605639

>>5605611
Has it changed? Show me.

>> No.5605668

>>5605639
i don't care enough but it's definitely the most popular show on youtube.

>> No.5605689

>>5605668
Congratulations, you're king of WalMart!

>> No.5605733
File: 8 KB, 256x192, mr burns blocks out sun.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5605733

In an An-Cap society what would stop Mr Burns building his machine that blocked out the sun?

>> No.5605743

>>5604613
as an accelerationist, i wholeheartedly support your ideology's hastened suicide

>> No.5605768

>>5605733
The fact that the sun's going to be on the other side of that mountain for half of the day

>> No.5605856

>>5604613

>I will dogmatically adhere to my convictions regardless of new evidence that brings the grounds for those convictions into question.

Yeah, those fucking liberals and their critical thinking skills, holy shit what a bunch of wankers, amirite?

>> No.5605873

...this is possibly THE worst argument for any philosophical idea that I have ever heard. And that includes "if God exists why haven't really powerful telescopes seen him yet?"

I mean, holy shit.

>> No.5605889

>>5605873
I expected Rogan to do a stoner "whoooooaaah" at the end but not even he could swallow all that nonsense

>> No.5605894

>>5605856

>I totally miss the point

>> No.5605902

>>5605889
Yeah. Well, I mean, there was no actual argument there. I only argue with humans because it is only humans for which arguments are one of the contributing factors to later behavior.

>> No.5605905

>>5605894

Which was what, kemosabe?

>> No.5605910

Determinism was debunked in the 1940's.

"God does not play dice with the universe" -Albert Einstein
"Don't tell God what to do, Albert." -Niels Bohr

>> No.5605961

>>5605910
>I'd rather be a random blip than a turning cog
QM is not a solution m8.

>> No.5606000

I believe in determinism. My brain is deteriorating at a fairly young age and I can't do anything to fix it. I give myself a couple years before I'm like Neitzche in his last years. Sucks

>> No.5606005

>>5605910
Our actions are still determined by something else, and complete randomness isn't free will, either.

>> No.5606300

>>5606000
If you can even come up with that fucking sentence then your brain isn't as bad as you think it is

>> No.5606329

>>5604598
The first philosopher was Plato and the last was Aristotle. Everyone since has been a bunch of posers. Except maybe Averroes and Aquinas.

>> No.5606339

>>5606005
Our actions aren't determined by other things. There are conditions that surround our actions, but they do not determine them. You're implying that the only way to have free-will would be to live in a Universe where only your will exists and your will is self-caused.

>> No.5606360

>>5606339
>What expectations I had formed, and how grievously was I disappointed! As I proceeded, I found my philosopher altogether forsaking mind or any other principle of order, but having recourse to air, and ether, and water, and other eccentricities. I might compare him to a person who began by maintaining generally that mind is the cause of the actions of Socrates, but who, when he endeavoured to explain the causes of my several actions in detail, went on to show that I sit here because my body is made up of bones and muscles; and the bones, as he would say, are hard and have joints which divide them, and the muscles are elastic, and they cover the bones, which have also a covering or environment of flesh and skin which contains them; and as the bones are lifted at their joints by the contraction or relaxation of the muscles, I am able to bend my limbs, and this is why I am sitting here in a curved posture—that is what he would say, and he would have a similar explanation of my talking to you, which he would attribute to sound, and air, and hearing, and he would assign ten thousand other causes of the same sort, forgetting to mention the true cause, which is, that the Athenians have thought fit to condemn me, and accordingly I have thought it better and more right to remain here and undergo my sentence; for I am inclined to think that these muscles and bones of mine would have gone off long ago to Megara or Boeotia—by the dog they would, if they had been moved only by their own idea of what was best, and if I had not chosen the better and nobler part, instead of playing truant and running away, of enduring any punishment which the state inflicts. There is surely a strange confusion of causes and conditions in all this. It may be said, indeed, that without bones and muscles and the other parts of the body I cannot execute my purposes. But to say that I do as I do because of them, and that this is the way in which mind acts, and not from the choice of the best, is a very careless and idle mode of speaking.

Socrates refuting the dumbass materialist determinists thousands of years ago on his deathbed.

>> No.5606362

>>5606329

educate yourself

>> No.5606374

>>5606362
>implying every philosopher since Descartes hasn't been terrible

They have all been nominalists. The whole lot of them. From Descartes onwards.

>> No.5606383

>>5606374

the boogieman's gonna get you

>> No.5606401

>>5605856
>liberals
>critical thinking
lal

>> No.5606404

>>5606300
I can't even convince myself to open up Microsoft Word to write a 250 word essay. Trust me. I'm fucked.

>> No.5606412

>>5604776
>How is capitalism special?
It established an extremely high level of productivity that could provide a decent living standard for pretty much everybody, but fails to do so apparently.

>> No.5606426

>>5606404

>I can't even convince myself to open up Microsoft Word to write a 250 word essay.

you and every other college kid.

>> No.5606452

>>5606426
I realize I suffer from serious internet addiction. It has rewired my brain in a negative way. I'm basically just a robot now visiting the same websites over and over, none of which enhance my cognition in a positive way. I seriously fear for my future and know there are others like me. Oh how I miss the 90s, when I wasn't afraid to step outside.

>> No.5606466

>>5606452
We've got le samey wamey woowoos

>> No.5606505

>>5606466
>Hold me
>Is our future safe? Are we too wrapped up in technology?

>> No.5606534

>>5606339
>the mind relies on the functioning of the brain
>the brain is a physical entity composed of physical particles
>These particles must abide by physical laws
>Therefore the mind has no choice but is merely at the whims of the laws of physics

do people seriously believe in free will?

>> No.5606570

>>5605495
b cuz muh international regulations on trade

>> No.5606644

>>5606360
Yes, because that totally holds up to modern scrutiny. Definitely.

>> No.5606753

>>5606452
Compose your 250 word paper in a 4chan post, but then copy and paste it into Word instead of submitting it.

>> No.5607016
File: 64 KB, 523x515, 1398376042002.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5607016

>>5606404
>tfw 5 sentence paragraph due before new year

>> No.5607030

>>5606000
but dem trips tho

>> No.5607239

>>5604636

Anarcho-capitalists want capitalism, but they don't want the state? But, capitalism is predicated on relations of private property, and private property logically necessitates a state apparatus as its mechanism of enforcement. So anarcho-capitalism is logically incoherent. And, empirically capitalism produces hierarchical inequalities in wealth distribution, incentivizes imperialist political and economic policies (cf. British India, basically all of American foreign policy, the European slicing up of Africa), and is implicated in generating and propagating racism (see Edmund S. Morgan's Slavery and Freedom: The American Paradox where he discusses racism as a product of class conflict between landed and unlanded whites) and sexism (see Caliban and the Witch by Silvia Federici and Marx's & Engels' writings on the family).

>> No.5607250

>>5604573
I don't speak the same language as the weather. If I did, I'd probably have better conversations with it than that fuck.

>> No.5607255

>>5604775
Underrated post.

>> No.5607256

The entire idea of "free will" is totally absurd, the only question is strength of will.

>> No.5607260

>>5607239

To the common southern american private property isn't an abstract idea it's a divine thing and any of the literature you just provided on the recorded effects of capitalism is completely nonexistent except in the form of strange strawmen.

>> No.5607261

>>5607239
Thats a fair critique, and I'm not an anarcho captilist, but I just see the same few critiques of anarcho capitalism which, taken on their own can give a misleading view of it.

I like to describe it like this; the state is the monopoly on the use of violence.
This isn't all that voluntary under capitalistic institutions, so the anarcho capitalistic invisions a world where everyone is allowed to use violence in order to protect their own property. Because violence is expensive, they envision institutions such as insurance companies to argue and negotiate, and that will become to body of the law. As the market is mostly efficient the law that is produced will be a lot better then the current system.

David friedman explains it best, and he relies on less Austrian economics and the non aggression princible which is a good thing to get away from.

>> No.5607264
File: 2.81 MB, 440x321, 1411418124631.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5607264

>This thread

>> No.5607267
File: 34 KB, 198x282, Schopenhauer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5607267

>>5606534
No, they just skirt around the issue and change definitions constantly.

Only ivory tower intellectuals defend free will.

>> No.5607303

>>5607261
> As the market is mostly efficient the law that is produced will be a lot better then the current system.

This is where the entire premise falls apart. Private investment in markets is not efficient, not on a macro scale. In Capitalist society, Investment in a given market is predicated upon the potential return on that Capital investment.

Over-investment in markets wastes production time and resources on goods that cant be marketed (no demand), which, at market efficiency, directly results in lower wages (labour used in creating product exceeds its market value. The same is true from the opposite ends, but it, naturally, effects prices as opposed to wages. Its kind of a moot pint, because markets never operate at equilibrium, but one of the reasons they don't is private ownership of the investment forces of society.

Nationalization of investment Capital in Socialized market systems hold some promise, though. Its not absolute Socialism, because the State still exists and has economic power, but its a start.

>> No.5607570

>>5604598
Don't compare Joe with Stefan please. Joe doesn't parade around calling himself a philosopher, I like Joe and would hang out with the guy. Stefan is a cunt.

>> No.5607590

>>5606401

ayy lmao

>> No.5607622

>>5605689
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

>> No.5607698

>>5604892
>an-caps are the economic equivalent of creationists
BTFO.

>> No.5607730

In this world, is the fate of mankind controlled by some kind of transcendental entity or law?

Is it like the hand of God hovering above?

At least it is true that man has no control over his own will.

>> No.5607737

>>5604573

this is fucking embarrassing.


that being said, i bet none of you sentient shit-heaps knows the reason why it is embarrassing.

>> No.5607740

>>5607737

Enlighten us, please.

>> No.5607762

>>5607740

i have nothing left to prove in this board, ace.

anonymous coward, it was my duty to be the shit. times have changed and no more of you cookie crisp lesbians are getting spoon fed.

howl faggot, but i am still the wolf

>> No.5607764

>>5607762
my nomination for /lit/ post of the decade

>> No.5607767
File: 1.52 MB, 315x173, coolstorybro.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5607767

>>5607764
>>5607762

samefag, pls.

>> No.5607775

>>5607767
No, I'm just a troll who realises how squeamish people can be about trips in fear that they might be squashed beneath them. Good old Anonymous gives some credit to everyone, you see.

>> No.5607790

>>5607762
>it was my duty to be the shit

What you did there. I see it. Glorious.

>> No.5607796

>>5604970

wow if only O'reilly made those arguments, the audience would be cluster fucked

>> No.5607836

still waiting on the board to prove that there exists at least one-fucking-person in here with breadth above that of a demented toddler.

its not hard faggots. spot the issue. he is prima facie wrong and yet, in 200 posts of pure masturbation, none of you pointed out why that is the case, being satisfied instead with this infinite loop of buzzword regurgitation.

hint: your answer to the question does not depend on your actual substantive take(couple with whatever arguments you heard your community college reject professor mumble through) on whether or not free will exists.

>> No.5607846

>>5607836
Is it because he's buttfucking retarded and debate is obviously subsumed, just as choice is (internal debate), by the determinists worldview? Woo, I'm right amn't I? My mom always told me I was really clever!!

Molyneux is obviously retarded

>> No.5607852

>>5607836

HE IS BYPASSING THE ISSUE. THE QUESTION OF FREEDOM OF THE WILL VS. DETERMINISM IS NOT ONE OF WHETHER HUMANS ASSESS OPTIONS AND "MAKE DECISIONS" BASED ON AVAILABLE EVIDENCE (THEY DO, WITHOUT QUESTION), BUT WHETHER PRIOR EVENTS CAN BE SAID TO CAUSE OR DETERMINE OUR ACTIONS.

FUCK OFF NOW

>> No.5607857

>>5607852
>>5607846


ahahaha oh god...

>> No.5607859

>>5607857
Actually both of those answers are correct.

>> No.5607860

>>5604613
>which I recognize is not anarchist
it is

>> No.5607861

>>5607857

THE EXPECTED ANSWER ARRIVES. WAS IT DETERMINED? UNDOUBTEDLY. GREAT TROLL, BRO. YOU WIN 450000000 4CHAN CREDITS. CONGRATULATIONS.

>> No.5607862

please tell me there is at least one single person in this rancid cess pool who didn't peel off the fuckingentirety of dried up paint in every single fucking room of their childhood home and eat it

>> No.5607867

>>5604701
>How would this end in anything other than bloodshed
Oh thank god the state system has ended all bloodshed and everything is done peacefully

>> No.5607870

>>5607859

no baby girl. now, both those posters said "true things."

still,

someone should be able to tell me why he is wrong.

>> No.5607876

>>5607870

You obviously have an answer loaded, so shoot or get the fuck out of Dodge City, faggot.

>> No.5607883

>>5607870
You don't seem to realise, but the way you post is so mired in overcompensation it's cringe-worthy - just a heads up.

>> No.5607885

>>5607876

ahaa you must be sniffing that lou caine faggot. any bitch who lift that K knows he has to face the metal.

and i already gave you a hint so chirp louder shitbird, i aint herd you yet

>> No.5607888

>>5607883

>cringing on an anonymous image board

typical bitch reaction and i have a large penis

>> No.5607893

>>5607888
No, that's actually you - faggots, baby girls, and bitches; that's a lovely line-up of delusionally imagined acquaintances ya got there.

>> No.5607898

>>5607893
+ there's the strained loudness; that you read kinda like the toughest kid in the schoolyard whose voice has recently started breaking

>> No.5607906

>>5607898
I mean, I get it, tripfagging can't be easy, shit a nigga need to imagine everyone in their jocks, but don't be so obvious about it you fucking pussy

>> No.5607909
File: 341 KB, 471x361, 1385600671164.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5607909

>>5604655
>. Police are completely unnecessary and completely indistinguishable from thugs who enforce the local warlords reign.

>> No.5607911

>>5607893

sweet boy, you're used to getting called out by the little cats; are you kiddin me? show fangs faggot or that meow gets mistaken for a cry for help.

>> No.5607922

>>5607911
>faggot
You're still imagining that I just want to kiss you? Maybe you should head on over to /b/ and get in on one of those circle jerks posting pics for other dudes to jack it too. Seems more your style.

>> No.5607923

>>5605485
>No, you can buy airspace, but you can't "buy" the atmosphere.
i dont understand
how can someone be this way

>> No.5607936

>>5605768
>The fact that the sun's going to be on the other side of that mountain for half of the day
holy fucking shit
its just amazing
this is why no-one wants to debate you
you have the awareness of a brick

>> No.5607953 [DELETED] 

>>5607922
I had who’s next to get stretched out with Dots.
please...
i reserve the right. cover you face and warosu me faggot, my shit so fucking ill the entire board got sick.

superficial pussy, all you do is float. yet you like the earth.

but I caught your raffle ticket sweetheart,
no biggie

>> No.5607972

>>5607953
Well don't you seem like a retard nobody

>> No.5607974

>>5607972
The psychology I mentioned is easy-pickings btw, just for future reference

>> No.5607993 [DELETED] 

>>5607972
>>5607974
Cans though, it’s exploding candles. I show cans so, any nigga feel like they free.
hah,
You gon’ need lady love for these divas, sweetie.
Cuz these niggas phil suck.vacuum cleaners

>> No.5608010 [DELETED] 

big rats play Chuck-E-Cheese. That just mean I got killer toys smiling.
but they like the violence ;)

god, they lord watch me spit deep into the clitoris of extinction. gag pussy, breathe in death's inebriant miasma, I'm classic.

>> No.5608012

>>5607993
So you still think it's just a bit, eh? Well, good luck with that.

>> No.5608031 [DELETED] 

>>5608010

man,It's a fuckin Chinese in this Lambo accident, you better show me mercy or I'll go across your Chin.
episteme shift, no Kuhn, I bust in the front. Leave a rose in the park for him,
It's just an art form. nigga I'm just a great westeren, That's where the form at in this century, great westeren, nigga where the format?

>> No.5608040 [DELETED] 

>>5608012
haha, Your chest gon' feel ho! ho! ho! I Saint Nick at night, faggot you watch nick@nite,
They hear it but don't see the body, faggot, you live a cricket life

>> No.5608044

>>5608031
What'd it take, like 6 minutes to come up with that? Embarrassing.

>> No.5608058 [DELETED] 

>>5608044

Tell your inner bitch "chill", I'll tragedy whores beamer,
It's a Samsung. One phonecall and your Galaxy 4's ringing.
I see horsie inside of you.

you gon' die when I bulma son in the water, you gon' need swimming trunks to survive pensions. It's a celebration
and I'm airing a high-five. heave you faggot when i hit big air. It's three little pigs. You'll find a knot by the hair on your chinny chin chin ;)

>> No.5608069

>>5604799
I wasn't going to support a proletarian revolution, but this post on a Chinese cartoon image board changed my mind.

>> No.5608080

>>5608058

Keep going please. Some of this is brilliant.

>> No.5608097
File: 46 KB, 339x398, Schopenhauer.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5608097

>1860+154
>still confusing freedom of action with freedom of will

YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU WILL

YOU CANNOT CHOOSE WHAT YOU WILL

>> No.5608101

>>5604799
/lit/ sings L'Internationale when?