Total Posts:31|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

How is your politics justified?

FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 2:03:16 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
According to you, what is it that makes your politics correct? Is it...

A. The nature of the universe.

B. The nature of human beings.

C. It merely lines up with my subjective morality.

D. Other.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 2:17:32 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:07:39 AM, darkkermit wrote:
I start with two initial premises:
right to self-ownership
homestead principle

Then I work from there.

Not sure if that answers my questions. Would the same still apply no matter what human nature was?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 2:20:03 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:17:32 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 7/29/2011 2:07:39 AM, darkkermit wrote:
I start with two initial premises:
right to self-ownership
homestead principle

Then I work from there.

Not sure if that answers my questions. Would the same still apply no matter what human nature was?

I wasn't sure If It did either. Moral truths can't be grounded in the universe. I would base it on human nature then.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 2:25:51 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:03:16 AM, FREEDO wrote:
According to you, what is it that makes your politics correct? Is it...

A. The nature of the universe.

B. The nature of human beings.

C. It merely lines up with my subjective morality.

D. Other.

D] When everyone is dead, who is left to complain?
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 2:40:44 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:17:32 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 7/29/2011 2:07:39 AM, darkkermit wrote:
I start with two initial premises:
right to self-ownership
homestead principle

Then I work from there.

Not sure if that answers my questions. Would the same still apply no matter what human nature was?

If human nature weren't what it is how would it be human?

In short, what is this I don't even.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 4:23:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:03:16 AM, FREEDO wrote:
According to you, what is it that makes your politics correct? Is it...

A. The nature of the universe.

B. The nature of human beings.

C. It merely lines up with my subjective morality.

D. Other.

C. It all boils down to what I, persoanlly, think is right and wrong.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 4:29:57 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:03:16 AM, FREEDO wrote:
According to you, what is it that makes your politics correct? Is it...

A. The nature of the universe.

B. The nature of human beings.

C. It merely lines up with my subjective morality.

D. Other.

D. Other, my politics generally revolve around my understanding of freedom and it's practical application being it's cheif regulator.
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 9:08:42 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:03:16 AM, FREEDO wrote:
According to you, what is it that makes your politics correct? Is it...

A. The nature of the universe.

B. The nature of human beings.

C. It merely lines up with my subjective morality.

D. Other.

I think it is C and D. C being many things should be moral (i.e. freedom is moral to me) and D being efficient and good from a cost benefit analysis.
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 9:51:36 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:03:16 AM, FREEDO wrote:
According to you, what is it that makes your politics correct? Is it...

A. The nature of the universe.

B. The nature of human beings.

C. It merely lines up with my subjective morality.

D. Other.

A, B, C, and D.

My beliefs are compatable with all of these. They take into account science and sustainability, while most other people do not bother with the trouble. I recognize that rights should not be given to anyone, because that is the method for which oppression is propagated. Rights are great for the recipient, but damaging to everyone else. My system of morality is in perfect sync with human nature.
Rob
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 9:56:43 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:03:16 AM, FREEDO wrote:
C. It merely lines up with my subjective morality.

Merely!!... Hah!

If it fulfills what you care about.. why wouldn't you support it?!

and why would you support something that doesn't support what you care about.

that said, Fulfilling what you care about in the complicated world really requires that you account for A and B anyways, for if your plans in dealing with people don't account for the nature of the universe, or the nature of people... they're not very good plans..
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 11:15:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:03:16 AM, FREEDO wrote:
According to you, what is it that makes your politics correct? Is it...

A. The nature of the universe.

B. The nature of human beings.

C. It merely lines up with my subjective morality.

D. Other.

Everyone that is honest should include C. In order to start with something like personal freedom, or self ownership, or whatever, you have to assume that they are morally right or "should be."

Mine are B and C.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 5:03:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:03:16 AM, FREEDO wrote:
B. The nature of human beings.
Yes, each to their own. Ideological politics are most justified.

C. It merely lines up with my subjective morality.
Yes and the subjective moral system of other people.

D. Other.
People should balance a society together. The government should not have 100% control over anything, nor should it let every single person be governed by same laws. People should be able to follow laws that they wish, except for general laws which must govern everyone (such as same punishment for murder regardless of the nature of the murderer or the murdered).
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 10:06:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
D) Practicality

For instance, property rights have practical benefits, and provide humans with convenience in life, so I support them.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 10:08:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:07:39 AM, darkkermit wrote:
I start with two initial premises:
right to self-ownership
homestead principle

Then I work from there.

That's not really "justified" though, is it? If the right to self-ownership was actually legitimate, then there would be no right for government to exist, whatsoever. But, I don't think it's objectively legitimate...

I mention government because you're a Minarchist, correct?
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 10:22:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 10:06:41 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
D) Practicality

For instance, property rights have practical benefits, and provide humans with convenience in life, so I support them.

Practical by what standard? Happiness?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 10:28:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:03:16 AM, FREEDO wrote:
According to you, what is it that makes your politics correct? Is it...

A. The nature of the universe.

B. The nature of human beings.

C. It merely lines up with my subjective morality.

D. Other.

This is misleading.

The "nature of the universe" and the "nature of human beings" are a set of facts about how reality functions. The way things are does not translate into the way things ought to be.

A and B aren't normative assumptions, they are statements of fact. They allow you to mold a political system such that you accomplish your normative goals. However, A and B aren't moral goals.

C is the connection of two normative statements (moral philosophy + political philosophy). "If you want to fulfill functions of philosophy x, then structure political system y considering the nature of of the universe and human beings."
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 10:30:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 2:07:39 AM, darkkermit wrote:
I start with two initial premises:
right to self-ownership
homestead principle

Then I work from there.

So your answer is C.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 10:40:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 10:28:12 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/29/2011 2:03:16 AM, FREEDO wrote:
According to you, what is it that makes your politics correct? Is it...

A. The nature of the universe.

B. The nature of human beings.

C. It merely lines up with my subjective morality.

D. Other.

This is misleading.

The "nature of the universe" and the "nature of human beings" are a set of facts about how reality functions. The way things are does not translate into the way things ought to be.

A and B aren't normative assumptions, they are statements of fact. They allow you to mold a political system such that you accomplish your normative goals. However, A and B aren't moral goals.

C is the connection of two normative statements (moral philosophy + political philosophy). "If you want to fulfill functions of philosophy x, then structure political system y considering the nature of of the universe and human beings."

That would be my opinion. I was asking what other though about it though. Many believe they can obtain moral or political truths from facts or the nature of the universe.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2011 11:16:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 10:08:51 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
At 7/29/2011 2:07:39 AM, darkkermit wrote:
I start with two initial premises:
right to self-ownership
homestead principle

Then I work from there.

That's not really "justified" though, is it? If the right to self-ownership was actually legitimate, then there would be no right for government to exist, whatsoever. But, I don't think it's objectively legitimate...

I mention government because you're a Minarchist, correct?

Right, I am a minarchist. However, I believe that governments main purpose is to protect property and life. I do not believe that a decentralized system (anarchy) could effectively solve the problem that human nature in that other try to dominate others.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2011 5:51:33 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/30/2011 12:47:52 AM, Rockylightning wrote:
D. I dont have any justification.

Yet.

Haha, that's how I would have answered.

"Who needs justification?"
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2011 8:23:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 11:16:41 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Right, I am a minarchist. However, I believe that governments main purpose is to protect property and life. I do not believe that a decentralized system (anarchy) could effectively solve the problem that human nature in that other try to dominate others.

Why not, and why can a government do it but a decentralized system not? Just curious.
President of DDO
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2011 2:27:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 10:22:57 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 7/29/2011 10:06:41 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
D) Practicality

For instance, property rights have practical benefits, and provide humans with convenience in life, so I support them.

Practical by what standard? Happiness?

Practical in that it's easier to allocate resources that way. If everything was public, it would essentially be free, and then you have the Tragedy Of The Commons problem, among other issues. To solve this issue, humans develop the idea of private property. It has no objective legitimacy, but it does make things easier for us.

So yeah, it does make people happier in the end, though that's not the only metric.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2011 2:31:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/29/2011 11:16:41 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 7/29/2011 10:08:51 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
At 7/29/2011 2:07:39 AM, darkkermit wrote:

That's not really "justified" though, is it? If the right to self-ownership was actually legitimate, then there would be no right for government to exist, whatsoever. But, I don't think it's objectively legitimate...

I mention government because you're a Minarchist, correct?

Right, I am a minarchist. However, I believe that governments main purpose is to protect property and life. I do not believe that a decentralized system (anarchy) could effectively solve the problem that human nature in that other try to dominate others.

Yeah, but my point is that if you view the right to self-ownership as a given, then an aggressive monopoly on arbitration is inherently immoral, isn't it?
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2011 2:42:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/30/2011 8:23:53 AM, Danielle wrote:
At 7/29/2011 11:16:41 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Right, I am a minarchist. However, I believe that governments main purpose is to protect property and life. I do not believe that a decentralized system (anarchy) could effectively solve the problem that human nature in that other try to dominate others.

Why not, and why can a government do it but a decentralized system not? Just curious.

Decentralized versions of legal institutions seem to become some form of tribal law in practice, which is what happened in Somalia anyway (Sharia, warlords, etc). Plus, even if you can sell your claim in a private system, I don't know how likely it's going to be that a lawyer will accept it without a certain amount of evidence, which isn't going to be available without public investigations. So, the enforcement of property rights might get a bit shady...

But, this is all speculation because there really isn't much empirical evidence to fall back on. All we have is medieval Iceland and modern Somalia.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2011 3:11:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/30/2011 5:51:33 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 7/30/2011 12:47:52 AM, Rockylightning wrote:
D. I dont have any justification.

Yet.

Haha, that's how I would have answered.

"Who needs justification?"

Which, technically, is still C.

Your justification is the assumption that moral philosophies do not need justification, which is a normative statement.

The only way I can see D being an option is if someone's political philosophy derives from a normative assumption, but one that does not derive your own moral philosophy.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2011 3:15:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/30/2011 2:27:39 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
At 7/29/2011 10:22:57 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 7/29/2011 10:06:41 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
D) Practicality

For instance, property rights have practical benefits, and provide humans with convenience in life, so I support them.

Practical by what standard? Happiness?

Practical in that it's easier to allocate resources that way. If everything was public, it would essentially be free, and then you have the Tragedy Of The Commons problem, among other issues. To solve this issue, humans develop the idea of private property. It has no objective legitimacy, but it does make things easier for us.

So yeah, it does make people happier in the end, though that's not the only metric.

Remember that "practicality" and "efficiency" are only means to a goal. If the goal is, for instance, "being the last human on earth" then a "practical" morality would have some very nasty consequences.

To say that the goal is some form of benefit to "humans" is not specific enough. A policy might practically benefit group A while hurting group B. A practical solution that benefits all of mankind might not benefit you specifically. Another practical solution might benefit anyone who is poor, but not rich people.

So the question is: practical to what end? Efficient to what end? "Convenience" of whom? Yourself? Your country? Homo sapiens sapiens? Life on earth?