Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Anarch, State and Utopia by Robert Nozick

  1. #1

    Anarch, State and Utopia by Robert Nozick

    Wanted to post this as I had never heard of this book before nor seen it mentioned here on the forums that I recall. A friend suggested I check it out following a discussion about politics and realizing my views were grounded in libertarian philosophy. I'm about half way through it but so far it's really good (good enough that I took a break to mention it here). But apparently this book had a lot to do with helping Ron Paul onto the road of libertarianism.

    pdf link: http://www.lib.cmb.ac.lk/wp-content/...and_utopia.pdf

    Cheers
    "Self conquest is the greatest of all victories." - Plato



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Spoiler Alert

     
    Nozick explains why anarcho-capitalism is impossible.


    ...which probably explains the book's lack of popularity in some circles.

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Spoiler Alert

     
    Nozick explains why anarcho-capitalism is impossible.


    ...which probably explains the book's lack of popularity in some circles.

    Yeah.

    Was just getting into that part and was hitting up forums checking some other sources to attempt to wrap my head around a few things he is getting off into along those line
    "Self conquest is the greatest of all victories." - Plato

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Intoxiklown View Post
    Yeah.

    Was just getting into that part and was hitting up forums checking some other sources to attempt to wrap my head around a few things he is getting off into along those line
    It's well worth reading.

    I'll be curious to hear your thoughts when you've finished.

    Remind me, are you an ancap or a minarchist libertarian?

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    It's well worth reading.

    I'll be curious to hear your thoughts when you've finished.

    Remind me, are you an ancap or a minarchist libertarian?
    I fall more into the minarchist camp based on the premise of some government being a necessary evil (mainly for an objective 3rd party for disputes....in a perfect world). Key word "some". And I should finish it tonight.....I got a bit sidetracked learning enough Italian to navigate Italian news archives....lol
    "Self conquest is the greatest of all victories." - Plato

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Intoxiklown View Post
    I fall more into the minarchist camp based on the premise of some government being a necessary evil (mainly for an objective 3rd party for disputes....in a perfect world). Key word "some". And I should finish it tonight.....I got a bit sidetracked learning enough Italian to navigate Italian news archives....lol
    Va bene, ma la notizia benissima e qui.
    Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 04-18-2018 at 04:45 PM.

  8. #7
    I've always comprehended the utilitarian argument for the State. I've just never gotten the advocacy of it.

    If you get that individuals own their lives, there really is no way to logically advocate for the State.

    The State is a super-human entity. And unless you believe that the State transmogrifies the human beings who occupy it, it's just a means to justify violence. Even in it's "most limited" (haha) iteration.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    I've always comprehended the utilitarian argument for the State. I've just never gotten the advocacy of it.

    If you get that individuals own their lives, there really is no way to logically advocate for the State.

    The State is a super-human entity. And unless you believe that the State transmogrifies the human beings who occupy it, it's just a means to justify violence. Even in it's "most limited" (haha) iteration.
    If you advocate for the state that makes you a ...... It's not rocket science.
    "The Patriarch"



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Also, whether statelessness is possible or not shouldn't be the question for people of good intention.

    Christians recognize and understand that evil is inevitable, yet they do not advocate on behalf of evil. It is inevitable that all life must at some point die, yet people who who understand the miracle of life do not advocate on behalf of death.

    Stand against it. Strike at the root of evil.

    It may sound like a trite, college freshman philosophy class stance... I wouldn't disagree with that take, actually. Yet in this case it is actually appropriate. Standing against the state, like standing against death or evil, is a moral stance - not a utilitarian one. Take a position on it and stand by it. As Rand said, any compromise with evil is evil. Period.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    Also, whether statelessness is possible or not shouldn't be the question for people of good intention. .
    Actually, it is literally the only thing that matters. If something does not work with a high likelihood then the idea should be completely discarded.

    I only have one life. I only care about maximizing my life. Pursuing things that cannot happen in reality would take away from my one life.



    Standing against the state, like standing against death or evil, is a moral stance - not a utilitarian one. Take a position on it and stand by it. As Rand said, any compromise with evil is evil. Period
    What if you think anarchy is evil? You are paraphrasing Ayn Rand, yet she thought anarchists were morally bankrupt. Ayn Rand thought anarchists were worse than Marxists.

    Quote Originally Posted by AYN RAND
    Anarchists are collectivists. Capitalism is the one system that requires absolute objective law, yet libertarians combine capitalism and anarchism. That’s worse than anything the New Left has proposed.

    But anarchism is a logical outgrowth of the anti-intellectual side of collectivism. I could deal with a Marxist with a greater chance of reaching some kind of understanding, and with much greater respect. Anarchists are the scum of the intellectual world of the Left, which has given them up. So the Right picks up another leftist discard.
    http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/anarchism.html

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Actually, it is literally the only thing that matters. If something does not work with a high likelihood then the idea should be completely discarded.
    Incorrect. You build from a foundation. No foundation, no building.

    A house built upon a foundation of sand will slip into the sea, as the proverb says.

    I only have one life. I only care about maximizing my life. Pursuing things that cannot happen in reality would take away from my one life.


    What if you think anarchy is evil? You are paraphrasing Ayn Rand, yet she thought anarchists were morally bankrupt. Ayn Rand thought anarchists were worse than Marxists.

    http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/anarchism.html
    You'd be wrong. And so was she. Next?

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    I've always comprehended the utilitarian argument for the State. I've just never gotten the advocacy of it.

    If you get that individuals own their lives, there really is no way to logically advocate for the State.

    The State is a super-human entity. And unless you believe that the State transmogrifies the human beings who occupy it, it's just a means to justify violence. Even in it's "most limited" (haha) iteration.
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    Also, whether statelessness is possible or not shouldn't be the question for people of good intention.

    Christians recognize and understand that evil is inevitable, yet they do not advocate on behalf of evil. It is inevitable that all life must at some point die, yet people who who understand the miracle of life do not advocate on behalf of death.

    Stand against it. Strike at the root of evil.

    It may sound like a trite, college freshman philosophy class stance... I wouldn't disagree with that take, actually. Yet in this case it is actually appropriate. Standing against the state, like standing against death or evil, is a moral stance - not a utilitarian one. Take a position on it and stand by it. As Rand said, any compromise with evil is evil. Period.
    Death is bad.

    Immortality is good.

    Medicine is a compromise, seeking to extend life, but short of immortality.

    Therefore, medicine is a comprise and should be rejected.

    ...what's wrong with this reasoning?

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Death is bad.

    Immortality is good.

    Medicine is a compromise, seeking to extend life, but short of immortality.

    Therefore, medicine is a comprise and should be rejected.

    ...what's wrong with this reasoning?
    Nothing. Nothing at all... if the State were a remedy of any kind. It is not, however. Not in any manifestation.

    I don't like quoting Rand (Ayn, of course), but she nailed it when she said, "in any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win".

    Or, if one prefers Joe Rogan (to paraphrase), you don't call a sandwich mad 98% of $#@! and 2% ham a ham sandwich. Or something like that.

    Anyway... your medicine causes cancer. It doesn't extend life. It's a time bomb.

    I don't know... how many analogies do I need?

    Parenthetically, I think at this point in time, it works like this - the State has so corrupted and defiled human beings that you're de facto correct - looking at the state (sic: condition) of humanity today - yeah, if we just yanked the State out of the equation, probably there would be a ton of chaos (there is a very compelling argument [Rothbard] that the State can only make things worse... I get that, but I think at ground-level, pulling the plug one-fell-swoop right now, 4/27/18 would probably be a $#@!show in terms of our day-to-day). That said, at it's foundation your analogy does not work - medicine treats an an illness by attacking it's root cause. The medicine you propose attacks the body, if we understand that the body is self-ownership.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    the State has so corrupted and defiled human beings that you're de facto correct - looking at the state (sic: condition) of humanity today - yeah, if we just yanked the State out of the equation, probably there would be a ton of chaos
    If the state caused people to need the state, as you're suggesting, how could the state have come about in the first place?

    ...

    The fact is, people are selfish and violent by nature (not all people, of course, but enough).

    The state is just the natural result of selfish and violent people fighting for dominance, until someone wins (winner = ruler).

    If you dismantle a state, all you're doing is unseating the victor of the last war and starting a new one (with the winner becoming the new ruler).

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    If the state caused people to need the state, as you're suggesting, how could the state have come about in the first place?
    Come on. That's busch league logic... and you know it.

    The fact is, people are selfish and violent by nature (not all people, of course, but enough).

    The state is just the natural result of selfish and violent people fighting for dominance, until someone wins (winner = ruler).

    If you dismantle a state, all you're doing is unseating the victor of the last war and starting a new one (with the winner becoming the new ruler).
    Importantly, this does not in any way obviate the objective, moral superiority of statelessness.

    Again, as I said, I get the utilitarian argument.



Similar Threads

  1. Anarchy State and Utopia - OCRed version
    By Dobertarian in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 09-15-2011, 08:53 PM
  2. Anarchy, State and Utopia torrent
    By Rael in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-16-2009, 10:40 PM
  3. Robert Nozick - Great Philosopher or Greatest Philosopher?
    By yongrel in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-30-2009, 10:12 PM
  4. #35 - Anarchy, State, and Utopia by Robert Nozick
    By AlexMerced in forum News About The Official Campaign
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-12-2007, 09:28 AM

Posting Permissions

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