Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Recommended Reading Concerning Political and Economic Theory

  1. #1

    Lightbulb Recommended Reading Concerning Political and Economic Theory

    Below are vital articles concerning the nature of government, of liberty, and the free-market production of defense:

    * Prof. Murray N. Rothbard, "The Anatomy of the State", Rampart Journal of Individualist Thought, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Summer 1965), pp. 1-24, https://cdn.mises.org/rampart_summer1965_2.pdf , https://webcitation.org/6ZvAbaX8z , http://www.freezepage.com/1447053835DURFWXQOPM . Reprinted in a collection of some of Rothbard's articles, Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature and Other Essays (Washington, DC: Libertarian Review Press, 1974), https://cdn.mises.org/Egalitarianism...20Essays_2.pdf , https://webcitation.org/6XfwvbslB .

    * Murray N. Rothbard, Ch. 1: "Defense Services on the Free Market", pp. 1-9 in id., Power and Market: Government and the Economy (Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, Inc., 1977; orig. pub. 1970), https://web.archive.org/web/20040720...wer&market.pdf , https://webcitation.org/5ve3w5w9a , http://www.freezepage.com/1447054194BCBULVTSAX .

    * Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, "The Private Production of Defense", Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1 (Winter 1998-1999), pp. 27-52, https://cdn.mises.org/14_1_2_0.pdf , https://webcitation.org/5ve41VasQ .

    * Hans-Hermann Hoppe, "Fallacies of the Public Goods Theory and the Production of Security", Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Winter 1989), pp. 27-46, https://cdn.mises.org/9_1_2_0.pdf , https://webcitation.org/5ve485kNf .

    * Prof. David D. Friedman, Ch. 29: "Police, Courts, and Laws--on the Market", pp. 114-120 in id., The Machinery of Freedom: Guide to a Radical Capitalism (La Salle, Ill.: Open Court Publishing Co., 1989; orig. pub. 1971), http://daviddfriedman.com/Libertaria...hapter_29.html , https://webcitation.org/5ve4A6KFZ , https://archive.is/I1mt4 .

    Concerning the ethics of human rights, the below book is the best book on the subject:

    * Murray N. Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty (New York, NY: New York University Press, 1998; orig. pub. 1982), https://web.archive.org/web/20131208...ard/ethics.pdf , https://webcitation.org/5ve4GO9l5 , http://www.freezepage.com/1447054928ZHDVKQZWOU .

    If one desires a solid grounding in economics then one can do no better than with the below texts:

    * Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Economic Science and the Austrian Method (Auburn, Ala.: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 1995), https://cdn.mises.org/Economic%20Sci...20Method_3.pdf , https://web.archive.org/web/20140426...books/esam.pdf , https://webcitation.org/63rQDYtj2 .

    The above small book by Prof. Hoppe doesn't delve into political theory, but only concerns the methodological basis of economics (i.e., the epistemology of economics). I would recommend that everyone read this short book *first* if they're at all interested in economics. There exists much confusion as to what economics is and what it is not. This book is truly great in elucidating the nature of economics and its epistemic basis. If one were to read no other texts on economics, then this ought to be the economic text that one reads. Plus it doesn't take all that long to read it.

    * Murray N. Rothbard, Ch. 17: "Toward a Reconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics", pp. 224-262 in Mary Sennholz (Ed.), On Freedom and Free Enterprise: Essays in Honor of Ludwig von Mises (Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1956), https://cdn.mises.org/On%20Freedom%2...%20Mises_2.pdf , https://webcitation.org/6Xz9WebJ6 , http://www.freezepage.com/1447055623CLUDAZDSPR . Reprinted in Murray N. Rothbard, The Logic of Action One: Method, Money, and the Austrian School (London, UK: Edward Elgar, 1997), pp. 211-255.

    * Murray N. Rothbard, Man, Economy, and State (Auburn, Ala.: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2nd ed., 2004; orig. pub. 1962), https://cdn.mises.org/Man,%20Economy...20Market_2.pdf , https://web.archive.org/web/20180415...20Market_2.pdf , https://webcitation.org/6Xfycj7zV .

    * Murray N. Rothbard, Power and Market: Government and the Economy (Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, Inc., 1977; orig. pub. 1970), https://web.archive.org/web/20040720...wer&market.pdf , https://webcitation.org/5ve3w5w9a , http://www.freezepage.com/1447054194BCBULVTSAX .

    These texts ought to be read in the order listed above. I would also add to the above list the below book:

    * Murray N. Rothbard, America's Great Depression (Auburn, Ala.: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 5th ed., 2000; orig. pub. 1963), https://cdn.mises.org/Americas%20Gre...pression_3.pdf , https://webcitation.org/6Xfyn2oXY .

    The above book concerns how governments create depressions (i.e., panics; recessions) through credit expansion (i.e., fractional-reserve banking and/or fiat money).

    On the matter of politics in relation to God, see my below article, which demonstrates the logically unavoidable anarchism of Jesus Christ's teachings as recorded in the New Testament (in addition to analyzing their context in relation to his actions, to the Tanakh, and to his apostles). It is logically complete on this subject, in the sense of its apodixis.

    * James Redford, "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 4, 2011 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2001), 60 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1337761, https://archive.org/download/JesusIs...-Anarchist.pdf , https://web.archive.org/web/20170721...hist-jesus.pdf , https://webcitation.org/66AIz2rJw .

    See also my below article, which demonstrates the logically unavoidable correctness of the anarcho-capitalist theory of human rights. It doesn't derive an "ought" from an "is"--rather, it derives an "ought" from an "ought": an "ought" everyone must necessarily presuppose in order to even begin to deny it.

    * James Redford, "Libertarian Anarchism Is Apodictically Correct", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 15, 2011, 9 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1972733, https://archive.org/download/Liberta...rtarianism.pdf , https://web.archive.org/web/20170721...rtarianism.pdf , https://webcitation.org/63xyCLjLm .

    For how physics allows unlimited progress by civilizations--to literally infinite intelligence and power--see my following article on physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof (i.e., mathematical theorem) of God's existence per the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics), and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE), which is also required by said known physical laws. The Omega Point cosmology has been published and extensively peer-reviewed in leading physics journals.

    * James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , http://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://webcitation.org/74HMsJGbP .

    Additionally, in the below resource are five sections which contain very informative videos of Prof. Tipler explaining the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE. The sixth section therein contains an audio interview of Tipler. I also provide some helpful notes and commentary for some of these videos.

    * James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", Apr. 18, 2019, https://pastebin.com/6bZDc7rB , https://archive.is/uHEyL , https://megalodon.jp/2019-0423-0435-...n.com/6bZDc7rB .



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    You only show up to attack Trump when he is wrong
    Make America the Land of the Free & the Home of the Brave again

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by RonZeplin View Post
    ["Jefferson Airplane - Eskimo Blue Day", midnightjukebox70s, Dec. 11, 2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCCQAr16dJk ]
    Hi, RonZeplin. What relevancy do you think this song has to anything contained in my above post?

  5. #4
    Hoppes a straight fascist. He wants to live in a cathedral not a bazaar, but he wants to do it without a "state". Just a manifest non-democratic will of the unified culture.

    He writes interesting stuff, but as a person he doesn't want to live in a free market society.

    There's a lot of libertarians who don't actually like liberty, it just hasn't occurred to them that a free society might not be what they imagined.

    I don't think there is a libertarian to far-right pipeline. I think there is a lot of crypto-fascists hiding their desire for a powerful state inside a rhetoric about a tiny or non-existent state with massive social coercion that is somehow not-a-state. As it is becoming obvious that a free market means brown people or brothels next door all these 'western values' people are going to have to choose between freedom and whiteness.
    Last edited by idiom; 07-13-2020 at 06:13 PM.
    In New Zealand:
    The Coastguard is a Charity
    Air Traffic Control is a private company run on user fees
    The DMV is a private non-profit
    Rescue helicopters and ambulances are operated by charities and are plastered with corporate logos
    The agriculture industry has zero subsidies
    5% of the national vote, gets you 5 seats in Parliament
    A tax return has 4 fields
    Business licenses aren't even a thing nor are capital gains taxes
    Constitutional right to refuse any type of medical care

  6. #5

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by idiom View Post
    Hoppes a straight fascist. He wants to live in a cathedral not a bazaar, but he wants to do it without a "state". Just a manifest non-democratic will of the unified culture.

    He writes interesting stuff, but as a person he doesn't want to live in a free market society.

    There's a lot of libertarians who don't actually like liberty, it just hasn't occurred to them that a free society might not be what they imagined.

    I don't think there is a libertarian to far-right pipeline. I think there is a lot of crypto-fascists hiding their desire for a powerful state inside a rhetoric about a tiny or non-existent state with massive social coercion that is somehow not-a-state. As it is becoming obvious that a free market means brown people or brothels next door all these 'western values' people are going to have to choose between freedom and whiteness.
    If I limited myself to only citing people I agree with completely, then the only person I could cite would be Jesus Christ. All the articles and books above I cited because they are objectively correct regarding their main theses.

    I haven't read great deal of Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe's more recent works, so I don't presume to be a chronicler of every word that he has ever written or spoken. But from what I've read of him, he's one of the principal defenders of the Nonaggression Principle.

    Yet if cracking open a few of Prof. Hoppe's papers is too much of a horror upon your mind, then fret not, for I've come to lend assistance. As I have extended the analysis regarding the apodictic correctness of libertarian rights theory even beyond that of Hoppe.

    For the details on that, see my below article, which demonstrates the logically unavoidable correctness of the anarcho-capitalist theory of human rights. It doesn't derive an "ought" from an "is"--rather, it derives an "ought" from an "ought": an "ought" everyone must necessarily presuppose in order to even begin to deny it.

    * James Redford, "Libertarian Anarchism Is Apodictically Correct", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 15, 2011, 9 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1972733, https://archive.org/download/Liberta...rtarianism.pdf , https://web.archive.org/web/20170721...rtarianism.pdf , https://webcitation.org/63xyCLjLm .

    Very much in congruence with my foregoing article, on the matter of politics in relation to God, see my below article, which demonstrates the logically unavoidable anarchism of Jesus Christ's teachings as recorded in the New Testament (in addition to analyzing their context in relation to his actions, to the Tanakh, and to his apostles). It is logically complete on this subject, in the sense of its apodixis.

    * James Redford, "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 4, 2011 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2001), 60 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1337761, https://archive.org/download/JesusIs...-Anarchist.pdf , https://web.archive.org/web/20170721...hist-jesus.pdf , https://webcitation.org/66AIz2rJw .

    For how physics allows unlimited progress by civilizations--to literally infinite intelligence and power--see my following article on physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof (i.e., mathematical theorem) of God's existence per the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics), and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE), which is also required by said known physical laws. The Omega Point cosmology has been published and extensively peer-reviewed in leading physics journals.

    * James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , http://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://webcitation.org/74HMsJGbP .

    Additionally, in the below resource are five sections which contain very informative videos of Prof. Tipler explaining the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE. The sixth section therein contains an audio interview of Tipler. I also provide some helpful notes and commentary for some of these videos.

    * James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", Apr. 18, 2019, https://pastebin.com/6bZDc7rB , https://archive.is/uHEyL , https://megalodon.jp/2019-0423-0435-...n.com/6bZDc7rB .

  7. #6
    I have read his papers.

    Do you think Jesus Christ says we ought to have neighbors that speak our language, look like us and behave like us? How would Jesus enforce such a social code?

    Why would Jesus see to strictly limit His neighbours freedoms?

    Also I went and had a look at your three papers after the first post, no need to spam them.
    In New Zealand:
    The Coastguard is a Charity
    Air Traffic Control is a private company run on user fees
    The DMV is a private non-profit
    Rescue helicopters and ambulances are operated by charities and are plastered with corporate logos
    The agriculture industry has zero subsidies
    5% of the national vote, gets you 5 seats in Parliament
    A tax return has 4 fields
    Business licenses aren't even a thing nor are capital gains taxes
    Constitutional right to refuse any type of medical care

  8. #7

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by idiom View Post
    I have read his papers.

    Do you think Jesus Christ says we ought to have neighbors that speak our language, look like us and behave like us? How would Jesus enforce such a social code?

    Why would Jesus see to strictly limit His neighbours freedoms?

    Also I went and had a look at your three papers after the first post, no need to spam them.
    For what my position is on our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, see my below articles. My following articles distill all of the most important aspects of veridical human knowledge into a comprehensive, coherent and unified whole: from theology, physics, science, ethics, legal theory, political theory, economics, sociology, evolutionary psychology, epistemology to history.

    * James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://sites.google.com/site/physic...ics-of-God.pdf .

    * James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", Pastebin.com, Apr. 18, 2019, https://pastebin.com/6bZDc7rB , https://archive.is/uHEyL , https://megalodon.jp/2019-0423-0435-...n.com/6bZDc7rB .

    * James Redford, "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 4, 2011 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2001), 60 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1337761, https://archive.org/download/JesusIs...-Anarchist.pdf , http://www.freezepage.com/1560442613QRSDHGPCAM , https://megalodon.jp/2019-0614-0116-...-Anarchist.pdf .

    * James Redford, "Libertarian Anarchism Is Apodictically Correct", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 15, 2011, 9 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1972733, https://archive.org/download/Liberta...rtarianism.pdf , http://www.freezepage.com/1560442546UTKUJCKYNM , https://megalodon.jp/2019-0614-0115-...rtarianism.pdf .

    * James Redford, "Societal Sadomasochism", Christian Forums, Apr. 19, 2019, https://archive.is/JPojL , https://megalodon.jp/2020-0325-0427-...ssion.450.html , https://web.archive.org/web/20200324...ssion.450.html , http://www.freezepage.com/1585078048SAWDZFDONX .

    * James Redford, "How to Last During Lovemaking Like a True Sex-God Stud", Internet Archive, May 12, 2019, 6 pp., ark:/13960/t0tr3j398, https://archive.org/download/InfiniL...-Technique.pdf , https://webcitation.org/78KGCK1s4 , http://www.freezepage.com/1557704775GXQCMMUNJE .

  9. #8

    Lightbulb

    It is logically impossible for government to be a general benefit to society, and hence governments are unavoidably incompetent if that is the desired goal. Government does not bring order to society, but rather disorder. Government is anarchy in the sense of societal chaos. Instead, it is the market which brings order and harmony to society, and to the extent that it is allowed to operate, it does so despite government, not because of it.

    For an apodictic proof of this per *wertfrei* economics via demonstrated preference, see the following article by Prof. Murray N. Rothbard:

    * Murray N. Rothbard, Ch. 17: "Toward a Reconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics", pp. 224-262 in Mary Sennholz (Ed.), On Freedom and Free Enterprise: Essays in Honor of Ludwig von Mises (Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1956), https://cdn.mises.org/On%20Freedom%2...%20Mises_2.pdf , https://webcitation.org/6Xz9WebJ6 , http://www.freezepage.com/1447055623CLUDAZDSPR . Reprinted in Murray N. Rothbard, The Logic of Action One: Method, Money, and the Austrian School (London, UK: Edward Elgar, 1997), pp. 211-255.

    What Prof. Rothbard shows in the foregoing citation is that it is logically impossible that government could be a general benefit to humanity, for the reason that government by definition operates on initiatory violence via its coercive regional monopoly on control over the law and via coercive wealth-extraction, and hence per demonstrated preference its victims of coercion reveal that they would have preferred that said compulsory transactions not have taken place. And due to the incommensurability of different people's subjective value scales, it is not logically possible to say if the beneficiaries of state violence gain more subjective value than its victims lose.

    Whereas on the free market, all transactions are voluntary, and hence each party to an exchange reveals per demonstrated preference that, *ex ante*, they prefer what they are transacting to receive over that which they are to give up. Thus, transactions on the market are mutually beneficial, in that each party to a transaction must expect to gain in utility.

    Prof. Rothbard takes leave of his analysis on this matter at this point. Howbeit, one can actually go further than Rothbard's above analysis of this topic, because rather than merely demonstrating that government is logically unproductive to society generally, one can actually demonstrate that government is logically antiproductive to society generally. The reason being is because parasitical exploitation allows such exploitative actors within a society to live on the expropriated wealth of productive members of said society. Whereas absent this exploitative extraction of wealth, in order to live in society, such expropriators would have to engage in voluntary interactions within society, and thus through demonstrated preference, each party to these voluntary transactions would be demonstrating that, *ex ante*, they expect to gain by these interactions. Thus, via such parasitism, society actually loses the mutually-beneficial gains in utility that would have to have taken place absent the subsistence which such violent exploitation allows its practitioners.

    The objection might arise that the distinction between coercive and voluntary actions is an irrelevant differentiation as regards demonstrated preference, since after all, doesn't the coerced party who relents to his aggressive victimizer thereby demonstrate that he prefers assenting to the assailant's demands over the consequences of dissenting to them?

    However, the aggressor himself demonstrates by his coercive actions that he believes that his coerced victims thereby lose in utility, otherwise there would have been no need for the aggressor to use force. Because if it were not for the assumption on the aggressor's part that his victim suffers a loss in the exchange, then his use of force would have been superfluous. And hence coercion does indeed occupy a unique place within the *wertfrei* analytical paradigm of demonstrated preference in showing a loss of utility on the victim's part, even--or indeed, especially--as so-regarded by the aggressor.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    I'd eliminate some of the anarchist literature: or leave it, but only for zoological purposes, as one might with, say, the work of Keynes or Fourier. I'd also eliminate quite a bit of the Hoppe. He's become popular for the wrong reasons (culture wars), which isn't his fault, except that he seems to have encouraged it. Most importantly, I note a total vacuum of Mises, which should be the starting point for any serious classical liberal/libertarian, assuming that one isn't inclined to go back to Menger and Bohm-Bawerk.

    P.S. Here's a practical screening tool.

    1. Go read Mises' "Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth."

    2. If you understand it, move on to other topics.

    3. If not, (re)read Human Action and return to step 1.
    Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 08-04-2020 at 08:54 PM.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  12. #10
    Needs way more Mises. Also, Bastiat.


    Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)

    • "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law." - The Law (p. 54)
    • "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." - Government (p. 99)
    • "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
      - Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)
    • "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
      - Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)

    ˇ tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito ˇ
    MOFA (Make Orwell Fiction Again)

  13. #11

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    I'd eliminate some of the anarchist literature: or leave it, but only for zoological purposes, as one might with, say, the work of Keynes or Fourier. I'd also eliminate quite a bit of the Hoppe. He's become popular for the wrong reasons (culture wars), which isn't his fault, except that he seems to have encouraged it. Most importantly, I note a total vacuum of Mises, which should be the starting point for any serious classical liberal/libertarian, assuming that one isn't inclined to go back to Menger and Bohm-Bawerk.

    P.S. Here's a practical screening tool.

    1. Go read Mises' "Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth."

    2. If you understand it, move on to other topics.

    3. If not, (re)read Human Action and return to step 1.
    See my below article, which demonstrates the logically unavoidable correctness of the anarcho-capitalist theory of human rights. It doesn't derive an "ought" from an "is"--rather, it derives an "ought" from an "ought": an "ought" everyone must necessarily presuppose in order to even begin to deny it.

    * James Redford, "Libertarian Anarchism Is Apodictically Correct", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 15, 2011, 9 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1972733, https://archive.org/download/Liberta...rtarianism.pdf , https://web.archive.org/web/20170721...rtarianism.pdf , https://webcitation.org/63xyCLjLm .

    On the matter of politics in relation to God, see my below article, which demonstrates the logically unavoidable anarchism of Jesus Christ's teachings as recorded in the New Testament (in addition to analyzing their context in relation to his actions, to the Tanakh, and to his apostles). It is logically complete on this subject, in the sense of its apodixis.

    * James Redford, "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 4, 2011 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2001), 60 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1337761, https://archive.org/download/JesusIs...-Anarchist.pdf , https://web.archive.org/web/20170721...hist-jesus.pdf , https://webcitation.org/66AIz2rJw .

    For how physics allows unlimited progress by civilizations--to literally infinite intelligence and power--see my following article on physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof (i.e., mathematical theorem) of God's existence per the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics), and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE), which is also required by said known physical laws. The Omega Point cosmology has been published and extensively peer-reviewed in leading physics journals.

    * James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , http://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://webcitation.org/74HMsJGbP .

    Additionally, in the below resource are five sections which contain very informative videos of Prof. Tipler explaining the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE. The sixth section therein contains an audio interview of Tipler. I also provide some helpful notes and commentary for some of these videos.

    * James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", Apr. 18, 2019, https://pastebin.com/6bZDc7rB , https://archive.is/uHEyL , https://megalodon.jp/2019-0423-0435-...n.com/6bZDc7rB .

    Further:

    It is logically impossible for government to be a general benefit to society, and hence governments are unavoidably incompetent if that is the desired goal. Government does not bring order to society, but rather disorder. Government is anarchy in the sense of societal chaos. Instead, it is the market which brings order and harmony to society, and to the extent that it is allowed to operate, it does so despite government, not because of it.

    For an apodictic proof of this per *wertfrei* economics via demonstrated preference, see the following article by Prof. Murray N. Rothbard:

    * Murray N. Rothbard, Ch. 17: "Toward a Reconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics", pp. 224-262 in Mary Sennholz (Ed.), On Freedom and Free Enterprise: Essays in Honor of Ludwig von Mises (Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1956), https://cdn.mises.org/On%20Freedom%2...%20Mises_2.pdf , https://webcitation.org/6Xz9WebJ6 , http://www.freezepage.com/1447055623CLUDAZDSPR . Reprinted in Murray N. Rothbard, The Logic of Action One: Method, Money, and the Austrian School (London, UK: Edward Elgar, 1997), pp. 211-255.

    What Prof. Rothbard shows in the foregoing citation is that it is logically impossible that government could be a general benefit to humanity, for the reason that government by definition operates on initiatory violence via its coercive regional monopoly on control over the law and via coercive wealth-extraction, and hence per demonstrated preference its victims of coercion reveal that they would have preferred that said compulsory transactions not have taken place. And due to the incommensurability of different people's subjective value scales, it is not logically possible to say if the beneficiaries of state violence gain more subjective value than its victims lose.

    Whereas on the free market, all transactions are voluntary, and hence each party to an exchange reveals per demonstrated preference that, *ex ante*, they prefer what they are transacting to receive over that which they are to give up. Thus, transactions on the market are mutually beneficial, in that each party to a transaction must expect to gain in utility.

    Prof. Rothbard takes leave of his analysis on this matter at this point. Howbeit, one can actually go further than Rothbard's above analysis of this topic, because rather than merely demonstrating that government is logically unproductive to society generally, one can actually demonstrate that government is logically antiproductive to society generally. The reason being is because parasitical exploitation allows such exploitative actors within a society to live on the expropriated wealth of productive members of said society. Whereas absent this exploitative extraction of wealth, in order to live in society, such expropriators would have to engage in voluntary interactions within society, and thus through demonstrated preference, each party to these voluntary transactions would be demonstrating that, *ex ante*, they expect to gain by these interactions. Thus, via such parasitism, society actually loses the mutually-beneficial gains in utility that would have to have taken place absent the subsistence which such violent exploitation allows its practitioners.

    The objection might arise that the distinction between coercive and voluntary actions is an irrelevant differentiation as regards demonstrated preference, since after all, doesn't the coerced party who relents to his aggressive victimizer thereby demonstrate that he prefers assenting to the assailant's demands over the consequences of dissenting to them?

    However, the aggressor himself demonstrates by his coercive actions that he believes that his coerced victims thereby lose in utility, otherwise there would have been no need for the aggressor to use force. Because if it were not for the assumption on the aggressor's part that his victim suffers a loss in the exchange, then his use of force would have been superfluous. And hence coercion does indeed occupy a unique place within the *wertfrei* analytical paradigm of demonstrated preference in showing a loss of utility on the victim's part, even--or indeed, especially--as so-regarded by the aggressor.

    * * * * *

    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    Needs way more Mises. Also, Bastiat.
    The sources I chose were selected as being the best ones to help educate people in matters of veridical economics and political theory. They already incorporate all the veridical political economy insights by Frédéric Bastiat and Prof. Ludwig von Mises, though in a more consistent, comprehensive and precise manner. Your suggestions would be good for those who are interested in the history of thought, i.e., in how said insights were developed. However, the resources I listed use the Scholarly Method, and hence for those who wish to delve into the history of such concepts, citations to the literature of such matters are already included within them.

  14. #12
    You can safely ignore anything Hoppe says on any topic related to anything. As far as the rest, nothing on that list has practical value in how the world works. Rothbard is fine to read. He's like Noam Chomsky. Useful for mental masturbation on the internet. Not so useful for living in the real world. The best thing I have read by Rothbard was his book on the Depression and it was wrong about why there was a depression.

    Hayek is the most important liberty thinker for political philosophy. He is extremely thoughtful and his ideas are grounded in pragmatism. Constitution of Liberty covers the essentials to a free society. A Hayekian society actually works and prospers.

    Economics in One Lesson is good to understand microeconomics. Combine that with market monetarism for macro, and you get something that accurately describes reality and works in the real world.

    The Fountainhead for personal philosophy.


    I have three or four books by Mises. Human Action was worthwhile. The Law and other Bastiat stuff is good. Anything Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell write are good and usually they apply to current issues. The Economic Way of Thinking is a very good textbook for economics that covers everything fairly and is for non-econ majors.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by LexEtLibertas View Post
    See my below article, which demonstrates the logically unavoidable correctness of the anarcho-capitalist theory of human rights. It doesn't derive an "ought" from an "is"--rather, it derives an "ought" from an "ought": an "ought" everyone must necessarily presuppose in order to even begin to deny it.

    * James Redford, "Libertarian Anarchism Is Apodictically Correct", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 15, 2011, 9 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1972733, https://archive.org/download/Liberta...rtarianism.pdf , https://web.archive.org/web/20170721...rtarianism.pdf , https://webcitation.org/63xyCLjLm .

    On the matter of politics in relation to God, see my below article, which demonstrates the logically unavoidable anarchism of Jesus Christ's teachings as recorded in the New Testament (in addition to analyzing their context in relation to his actions, to the Tanakh, and to his apostles). It is logically complete on this subject, in the sense of its apodixis.

    * James Redford, "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 4, 2011 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2001), 60 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1337761, https://archive.org/download/JesusIs...-Anarchist.pdf , https://web.archive.org/web/20170721...hist-jesus.pdf , https://webcitation.org/66AIz2rJw .

    For how physics allows unlimited progress by civilizations--to literally infinite intelligence and power--see my following article on physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof (i.e., mathematical theorem) of God's existence per the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics), and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE), which is also required by said known physical laws. The Omega Point cosmology has been published and extensively peer-reviewed in leading physics journals.

    * James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , http://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://webcitation.org/74HMsJGbP .

    Additionally, in the below resource are five sections which contain very informative videos of Prof. Tipler explaining the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE. The sixth section therein contains an audio interview of Tipler. I also provide some helpful notes and commentary for some of these videos.

    * James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", Apr. 18, 2019, https://pastebin.com/6bZDc7rB , https://archive.is/uHEyL , https://megalodon.jp/2019-0423-0435-...n.com/6bZDc7rB .

    Further:

    It is logically impossible for government to be a general benefit to society, and hence governments are unavoidably incompetent if that is the desired goal. Government does not bring order to society, but rather disorder. Government is anarchy in the sense of societal chaos. Instead, it is the market which brings order and harmony to society, and to the extent that it is allowed to operate, it does so despite government, not because of it.

    For an apodictic proof of this per *wertfrei* economics via demonstrated preference, see the following article by Prof. Murray N. Rothbard:

    * Murray N. Rothbard, Ch. 17: "Toward a Reconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics", pp. 224-262 in Mary Sennholz (Ed.), On Freedom and Free Enterprise: Essays in Honor of Ludwig von Mises (Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1956), https://cdn.mises.org/On%20Freedom%2...%20Mises_2.pdf , https://webcitation.org/6Xz9WebJ6 , http://www.freezepage.com/1447055623CLUDAZDSPR . Reprinted in Murray N. Rothbard, The Logic of Action One: Method, Money, and the Austrian School (London, UK: Edward Elgar, 1997), pp. 211-255.

    What Prof. Rothbard shows in the foregoing citation is that it is logically impossible that government could be a general benefit to humanity, for the reason that government by definition operates on initiatory violence via its coercive regional monopoly on control over the law and via coercive wealth-extraction, and hence per demonstrated preference its victims of coercion reveal that they would have preferred that said compulsory transactions not have taken place. And due to the incommensurability of different people's subjective value scales, it is not logically possible to say if the beneficiaries of state violence gain more subjective value than its victims lose.

    Whereas on the free market, all transactions are voluntary, and hence each party to an exchange reveals per demonstrated preference that, *ex ante*, they prefer what they are transacting to receive over that which they are to give up. Thus, transactions on the market are mutually beneficial, in that each party to a transaction must expect to gain in utility.

    Prof. Rothbard takes leave of his analysis on this matter at this point. Howbeit, one can actually go further than Rothbard's above analysis of this topic, because rather than merely demonstrating that government is logically unproductive to society generally, one can actually demonstrate that government is logically antiproductive to society generally. The reason being is because parasitical exploitation allows such exploitative actors within a society to live on the expropriated wealth of productive members of said society. Whereas absent this exploitative extraction of wealth, in order to live in society, such expropriators would have to engage in voluntary interactions within society, and thus through demonstrated preference, each party to these voluntary transactions would be demonstrating that, *ex ante*, they expect to gain by these interactions. Thus, via such parasitism, society actually loses the mutually-beneficial gains in utility that would have to have taken place absent the subsistence which such violent exploitation allows its practitioners.

    The objection might arise that the distinction between coercive and voluntary actions is an irrelevant differentiation as regards demonstrated preference, since after all, doesn't the coerced party who relents to his aggressive victimizer thereby demonstrate that he prefers assenting to the assailant's demands over the consequences of dissenting to them?

    However, the aggressor himself demonstrates by his coercive actions that he believes that his coerced victims thereby lose in utility, otherwise there would have been no need for the aggressor to use force. Because if it were not for the assumption on the aggressor's part that his victim suffers a loss in the exchange, then his use of force would have been superfluous. And hence coercion does indeed occupy a unique place within the *wertfrei* analytical paradigm of demonstrated preference in showing a loss of utility on the victim's part, even--or indeed, especially--as so-regarded by the aggressor.

    * * * * *



    The sources I chose were selected as being the best ones to help educate people in matters of veridical economics and political theory. They already incorporate all the veridical political economy insights by Frédéric Bastiat and Prof. Ludwig von Mises, though in a more consistent, comprehensive and precise manner. Your suggestions would be good for those who are interested in the history of thought, i.e., in how said insights were developed. However, the resources I listed use the Scholarly Method, and hence for those who wish to delve into the history of such concepts, citations to the literature of such matters are already included within them.
    I'll take a look at your essays and respond in detail, but expect a critical response.

    For instance, argumentation ethics (on which you seem to be relying) doesn't work, or at least not in the way that you probably think.

    ...to be continued.

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    You can safely ignore anything Hoppe says on any topic related to anything. As far as the rest, nothing on that list has practical value in how the world works. Rothbard is fine to read. He's like Noam Chomsky. Useful for mental masturbation on the internet. Not so useful for living in the real world. The best thing I have read by Rothbard was his book on the Depression and it was wrong about why there was a depression.

    Hayek is the most important liberty thinker for political philosophy. He is extremely thoughtful and his ideas are grounded in pragmatism. Constitution of Liberty covers the essentials to a free society. A Hayekian society actually works and prospers.

    Economics in One Lesson is good to understand microeconomics. Combine that with market monetarism for macro, and you get something that accurately describes reality and works in the real world.

    The Fountainhead for personal philosophy.

    I have three or four books by Mises. Human Action was worthwhile. The Law and other Bastiat stuff is good. Anything Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell write are good and usually they apply to current issues. The Economic Way of Thinking is a very good textbook for economics that covers everything fairly and is for non-econ majors.
    I don't know that I'd go quite that far concerning Hoppe. Much of what he says is sensible, orthodox Austrianism or libertarianism. His original work, on the other hand, I don't find particularly interesting, even if not wrong. I view him as a silver age commentator, so to speak, who does a reasonably good job in exegesis, but struggles beyond that. Did you ever hear Murray's lectures at NYU? Hoppe was a student in that class who appears in the recording from time to time (he made it, actually, IIRC). I don't think he ever got beyond being Murray's student. And then there's the culture war part, which is highly unfortunate; I do get the impression that's he's being genuine in that respect, though, contra being a bandwagon jumper, for whatever that may be worth.

    As to Mises, and I think we might have discussed this before, I wish Ludwig had published the first couple chapters of Human Action separately, because, while sound, they're dull and distracting to most folks. Mises was still haunted by the methodenstreit with the historical school that consumed most of the productive career of Menger, and so he included all of that prefatory material (and elsewhere too, not just in HA).

    The Fountainhead? Man, I can't stand Rand's writing. I approve of the ideas, more or less, but it's just atrocious fiction IMO.

    ...reminiscent of Christian rock, not of much use as either rock or Christianity.

    I'd suggest Mises and then Hemingway, rather than a bastard combination.

    Likewise, in lieu of Christian rock, read Aquinas and then listen to Led Zeppelin.
    Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 08-05-2020 at 05:36 PM.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    I'll take a look at your essays and respond in detail, but expect a critical response.

    For instance, argumentation ethics (on which you seem t

    ...to be continued.



    I don't know that I'd go quite that far concerning Hoppe. Much of what he says is sensible, orthodox Austrianism or libertarianism. His original work, on the other hand, I don't find particularly interesting, even if not wrong. I view him as a silver age commentator, so to speak, who does a reasonably good job in exegesis, but struggles beyond that. Did you ever hear Murray's lectures at NYU? Hoppe was a student in that class who appears in the recording from time to time (he made it, actually, IIRC). I don't think he ever got beyond being Murray's student. And then there's the culture war part, which is highly unfortunate; I do get the impression that's he's being genuine in that respect, though, contra being a bandwagon jumper, for whatever that may be worth.

    As to Mises, and I think we might have discussed this before, I wish Ludwig had published the first couple chapters of Human Action separately, because, while sound, they're dull and distracting to most folks. Mises was still haunted by the methodenstreit with the historical school that consumed most of the productive career of Menger, and so he included all of that prefatory material (and elsewhere too, not just in HA).

    The Fountainhead? Man, I can't stand Rand's writing. I approve of the ideas, more or less, but it's just atrocious fiction IMO.

    ...reminiscent of Christian rock, not of much use as either rock or Christianity.
    I have the three book set of Human Action. The first 130 pages or so of the first book are unreadable.

    The actual economic reasoning is extremely impressive. He is very clear and logical. If you took something like equal pay laws or something like what is the role of the entrepreneur Mises is the best at breaking the issue down. I remember being pretty impressed with his reasoning on the gold standard even though I think it probably is isn't possible now. Mises is a very good defender of how capitalism raises standards of living.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    I have the three book set of Human Action. The first 130 pages or so of the first book are unreadable.

    The actual economic reasoning is extremely impressive. He is very clear and logical. If you took something like equal pay laws or something like what is the role of the entrepreneur Mises is the best at breaking the issue down. I remember being pretty impressed with his reasoning on the gold standard even though I think it probably is isn't possible now. Mises is a very good defender of how capitalism raises standards of living.
    Agreed

    If anyone's interested in the methodological issues, by the way, see his Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science.

    ...which is where those first couple chapters should have been originally published.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  18. #16

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    I'll take a look at your essays and respond in detail, but expect a critical response.

    For instance, argumentation ethics (on which you seem to be relying) doesn't work, or at least not in the way that you probably think.

    ...to be continued.

    ...
    All the articles and books I cited in my originating post of this thread because they are objectively correct regarding their main theses. Further, I have extended the analysis regarding the apodictic correctness of libertarian rights theory even beyond that of Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

    See also my following works:

    * James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://sites.google.com/site/physic...ics-of-God.pdf .

    * James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", Pastebin.com, Apr. 18, 2019, https://pastebin.com/6bZDc7rB , https://archive.is/uHEyL , https://megalodon.jp/2019-0423-0435-...n.com/6bZDc7rB .

    * James Redford, "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 4, 2011 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2001), 60 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1337761, https://archive.org/download/JesusIs...-Anarchist.pdf , http://www.freezepage.com/1560442613QRSDHGPCAM , https://megalodon.jp/2019-0614-0116-...-Anarchist.pdf .

    * James Redford, "Libertarian Anarchism Is Apodictically Correct", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 15, 2011, 9 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1972733, https://archive.org/download/Liberta...rtarianism.pdf , http://www.freezepage.com/1560442546UTKUJCKYNM , https://megalodon.jp/2019-0614-0115-...rtarianism.pdf .

    * James Redford, "Societal Sadomasochism", Christian Forums, Apr. 19, 2019, https://archive.is/JPojL , https://megalodon.jp/2020-0325-0427-...ssion.450.html , https://web.archive.org/web/20200324...ssion.450.html , http://www.freezepage.com/1585078048SAWDZFDONX .

    * James Redford, "How to Last During Lovemaking Like a True Sex-God Stud", Internet Archive, May 12, 2019, 6 pp., ark:/13960/t0tr3j398, https://archive.org/download/InfiniL...-Technique.pdf , https://webcitation.org/78KGCK1s4 , http://www.freezepage.com/1557704775GXQCMMUNJE .

    * * * * *

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    You can safely ignore anything Hoppe says on any topic related to anything. As far as the rest, nothing on that list has practical value in how the world works. Rothbard is fine to read. He's like Noam Chomsky. Useful for mental masturbation on the internet. Not so useful for living in the real world. The best thing I have read by Rothbard was his book on the Depression and it was wrong about why there was a depression.

    Hayek is the most important liberty thinker for political philosophy. He is extremely thoughtful and his ideas are grounded in pragmatism. Constitution of Liberty covers the essentials to a free society. A Hayekian society actually works and prospers.

    Economics in One Lesson is good to understand microeconomics. Combine that with market monetarism for macro, and you get something that accurately describes reality and works in the real world.

    The Fountainhead for personal philosophy.


    I have three or four books by Mises. Human Action was worthwhile. The Law and other Bastiat stuff is good. Anything Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell write are good and usually they apply to current issues. The Economic Way of Thinking is a very good textbook for economics that covers everything fairly and is for non-econ majors.
    See above.
    Last edited by LexEtLibertas; 08-05-2020 at 06:07 PM.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by LexEtLibertas View Post
    All the articles and books I cited in my originating post of this thread because they are objectively correct regarding their main theses. Further, I have extended the analysis regarding the apodictic correctness of libertarian rights theory even beyond that of Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe.
    I appreciate that you saw fit to give these things serious thought and write about them and, again, I'll give it all a read and get back to you.

    But I'll say again, expect a critical response, especially considering how liberally you throw in terms like apodictic.

    There's very little apodictic knowledge in the world and I'm, well, apodictically certain that none of it relates to any theory of ethics.

    Any argument that a particular ethical proposition is objectively true ultimately falls afoul of Hume.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  21. #18

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    I appreciate that you saw fit to give these things serious thought and write about them and, again, I'll give it all a read and get back to you.

    But I'll say again, expect a critical response, especially considering how liberally you throw in terms like apodictic.

    There's very little apodictic knowledge in the world and I'm, well, apodictically certain that none of it relates to any theory of ethics.

    Any argument that a particular ethical proposition is objectively true ultimately falls afoul of Hume.
    You're thereby stating that your own ethical propositions are purely irrational, nothing more than an ćsthetic preference, such as one who happens to prefer one flavor of ice cream over another. Yes, I have quite noticed this about you, i.e., regarding your whim-worshipping inconsistency. In that, I agree with you.

    However, if God exists--and He does--then whatever His Will is is objectively correct, since it is logically impossible that the infinite sapient intelligence could make an error. Indeed, God is nothing more and nothing less than Logic Itself, i.e., the Logos--but therein is infinite everything. It is therefore logically impossible that God could be anything other than perfectly logical, for then that would mean that God is not-God, which is a violation of the Law of Identity.

    Almost all of modern world society has been inducted to some extent by their respective governments into a completely misanthropic and nihilistic antitheist Weltanschauung, a Godless worldview of eternal death. It is the sine qua non of the serial-killer ethos.

    Even nominal mass-Christianity has been to a large degree inducted into this worldview by buying into the God-haters' mendacious propaganda regarding there being a conflict between science and religion. But it is a lie: for ever since Newton's physics, and especially with General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics (either separately or combined), God's existence has always been a mathematically-unavoidable result.

    As Prof. Noam Chomsky correctly observed, the so-called New Atheists are themselves quite religious. They worship a God, but their God is the state. (Note that Chomsky himself is guilty of state-worship in a number of areas, but nevertheless, despite his many faults, he does sometimes make penetrating observations.) Their objections to others' religions, especially Christianity, is simply nothing more than attempting to eliminate their competition. However, as Chomsky also astutely noted, the New Atheists' religion is by far the most bloody and murderous religion to ever exist. Eliminating God in the 20th century didn't make the governments more liberal; instead, it simply removed any higher notion of truth to which those governments were expected to abide. The state made itself God.

    The anti-Christ religion of government is the irrational religion of lies, gang-rape, mutilating torture and mass-murder. Whereas Christianity is the rational religion of truth, peace, eternal life and divergence to infinite pleasure and intelligence.

    The foregoing process which I describe is actually logically unavoidable. If God in the literal sense of the infinite sapient being does not exist, then all is permissible. Even if one can prove that, say, libertarianism is apodictically true in the same degree that 2+2 = 4 is true, so what? In the end, we're all dead anyway. The only thing that could give life any meaning beyond mere delusion is if God exists, since then an infinite computational state would exist, thereby allowing finite minds to endlessly grow in complexity toward infinite perfection (per the Quantum Recurrence Theorem). Only then would one's life-work avoid coming to naught. Only then would what one does now actually matter in the end.

    As it turns out, the universe is a machine that will diverge to infinite computing power. To wit:

    God's existence is a mathematical theorem within standard physics. Standard physics is the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics. This theorem has been given in the form of physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology. These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, "one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem." (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)

    Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals, such as Reports on Progress in Physics (the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional organization for physicists), Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), the International Journal of Theoretical Physics (a journal that Nobel Prize in Physics winner Richard Feynman also published in), and Physics Letters, among other journals.

    Prof. Tipler's Ph.D. is in the field of Global General Relativity, which is the field created by Profs. Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose during the formulation of their Singularity Theorems in the 1960s. Global General Relativity is General Relativity applied on the scale of the entire universe as a whole, and is the most elite and rarefied field of physics. Tipler is also an expert in quantum field theory (i.e., Quantum Mechanics combined with special-relativistic particle physics) and computer theory.

    For much more on Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the details on how it uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following article, which also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology:

    * James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://webcitation.org/74HMsJGbP .

    Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE.

    * James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", Pastebin.com, Apr. 18, 2019, https://pastebin.com/6bZDc7rB , https://archive.is/uHEyL , https://megalodon.jp/2019-0423-0435-...n.com/6bZDc7rB .

    * * * * *

    Speaking of the New Atheists:

    The below is an excellent lecture by neuroscientist Dr. Sam Harris, one of the main leaders of the New Atheist movement, at a June 2016 TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) conference.

    * "Can we build AI without losing control over it? | Sam Harris", TED ( youtube.com/user/TEDtalksDirector ), Oct. 19, 2016

    Mirror: https://www.ted.com/talks/sam_harris...ontrol_over_it

    As Dr. Harris points out, unless there is something literally magic about the operations of our brains, then it is a purely physical process that can be replicated via advanced-enough technology. Harris further points out that given any rate of progress, it is inevitable that superintelligent godlike machines will one day be constructed. So Harris believes in the existence of gods, it's just that he knows--as do I--that they exist in the future; and the not-so-distant future, at that. Therefore we come to the ironic insight that materialistic atheism, consistently applied, unavoidably results in theism. Consistent scientific atheism turns out to be theism.



Similar Threads

  1. RPF Recommended reading list..
    By afwjam in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 01-09-2012, 01:13 PM
  2. NEA Recommended Reading
    By Austrian Econ Disciple in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-02-2009, 01:08 PM
  3. Ron's recommended reading list
    By Truth Warrior in forum The Revolution's Future
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-05-2008, 11:30 AM
  4. Recommended Reading
    By MO4RonPaul in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-01-2007, 05:00 AM
  5. Recommended Reading - What are your favorite books?
    By hard@work in forum Books & Literature
    Replies: 70
    Last Post: 09-18-2007, 06:13 AM

Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •