the philosophy of anarchy...

nosoup4crr

Diabloii.Net Member
the philosophy of anarchy...

I was having a discussion with a friend of mine, when I recalled an argument made in a class I had as an undergrad. There's a famous philosophical proof for the superiority of anarchy to either all government or to democracy. By proof, I mean that the points are laid out (i.e. 1) coercion is a negative, 2) government is coercion, etc.)

Does anyone know what I'm talking about. And if so, do they know the proof or where I could find it?
 

krischan

Europe Trade Moderator
Re: the philosophy of anarchy...

That sounds like a proof that water is bad for you because booze contains lots of it :scratchchin:

BTW, when searching for "anarchy proof philosophic" on Google, the first hit for me is this page :D

Whatever, perhaps you mean the book "Anarchy, State, and Utopia" from Robert Nozick. I'm just citing Google BTW, I don't have a clue about philosophic literature.
 

Johnny

Banned
Re: the philosophy of anarchy...

Anarchy is what we had for about 2 seconds before one guy slapped another guy across the head and told him to build a hut.

If we every where to have anarchy for every one second then the rich and powerful few would subdue the many and we would be back to tribal societys. Work our was up to kingdoms and then mayby in 3-5.000 years, democracy.
 

mixritpitlik

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: the philosophy of anarchy...

In theory anarchy would work, problem is the "in theory" part as Johnny explained. No idea which proof you are looking for. Sorry
 

bladesyz

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: the philosophy of anarchy...

This argument caught my eye:
Part 3:

Coercion is "intrinsically" bad.

The definition he gave for intrinsically bad is: if something is intrinsically bad, we wouldn't do it for the sake of doing it. That is to say if we could have our children all be educated in calculus by the age of 11, we woudln't force them into school...we would let them learn calculus by alternate means. or, also for example...If there were a way to rid the society of crime, why would we use Prison(coercion) in order to stop it. we wouldn't. therefore, i can't see how you can say that coercion is intrinsically good.
This is the fatal weakness of the argument. If anything that we won't do for the sake of doing is "bad", then human society is evil incarnate, because it is built upon people doing things they'd rather not do (i.e. work).

This argument is equivocating our desire for leisure with our sense of morality, which is absolutely retarded.



 

BobCox2

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: the philosophy of anarchy...

Wink Wink, Nudge Nudge, Know What I mean? Know What I mean?
 

nosoup4crr

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: the philosophy of anarchy...

haha...apparently this isn't the first time I've brought up the topic on these forums. Thanks for pointing that out for me. I don't even remember having made that thread.
 

BobCox2

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: the philosophy of anarchy...

Larry Niven did a nice story about a place called King's Free Park I think, Read it.
 

Locke07

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: the philosophy of anarchy...

I am a Philosophy major at Ohio University. I am not familiar with any "proof", but Emma Goldman does have much to say about the nature and reasoning behind anarchy. I suggest you pick up some of her works and read through.

As to the argument given- intrinsically bad had been given the wrong definition. It means to be wholly within the thing in question. I suppose a better word to use would be Prima Facie, meaning at first glance. Typically coercion would be wrong in almost all cases (first glance), but under some thought experiments we may find a situation in which it is a lesser of two evils, or even a good in and of itself.
 

Johnny

Banned
Anarchy is a pipe dream like communism and libertarianism. Not practical in the real world.


Except that anarchy is not even practical in an imaginary world.

Although neither is libertarianism.
 

moo-cow

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: the philosophy of anarchy...

Wink Wink, Nudge Nudge, Know What I mean? Know What I mean?
look out or I'll wink wink nudge nudge you with the point of my spear.

in theory I've always thought it sounded great, but like every other form of government it needs the support of the people. Which will also slow down the nudging with spears. Small scale socialism works on kibbutzim in Israel because the people that are there want to be there (and the Thais who get paid to be there). Large scale... if people don't like it and try to leave you'd better have a large, cold region in the north with no escape to hide them in.



 

SaroDarksbane

Diabloii.Net Site Pal
Re: the philosophy of anarchy...

In theory anarchy would work
What are we defining as "in theory"?

I'd say ideas like Communism, Anarchism, Free-Market Capitalism, etc. are only as strong "in theory" as the assumptions they are founded on.

One assumption of Communism is that people will still choose to work hard even when their rewards are not tied to how hard they work. I find this assumption incorrect. Therefore, I don't think Communism works "in theory". One of the assumptions of Free-Market Capitalism is that people will do what benefits them most. I find this assumption much more correct, so assuming I accept the other assumptions of Free-Market Capitalism, I would say it works "in theory".

To say something works "in theory" but not "in reality" is to say that there is something in the theory that wasn't accounted for, and if that is the case, the theory is wrong.



 

BobCox2

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: the philosophy of anarchy...

See Scientific method, Theory is just the best current Hypothesis.
We Got to agree on this term or I can't have a meaningful conversation with you OK?
 

Johnny

Banned
Re: the philosophy of anarchy...

One of the assumptions of Free-Market Capitalism is that people will do what benefits them most. I find this assumption much more correct, so assuming I accept the other assumptions of Free-Market Capitalism, I would say it works "in theory".
However libertarianism also assumes that in a world ruled completely by money. That the rich will still respect the rights of the poor and not use their wealth to control them.

Libertarianism is just another word for anarchy and the result would still be the same warlord ruled tribal societys.



 
Top