About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Forward one pageLast Page


Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Post 20

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 4:25pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"acting irrationally will bring negative consequences on their own".

Not only! A drunk driver can kill you and me...and himself. ;-)


Post 21

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 4:40pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Rick,
"Sloppy word choice is a major cause of disagreements."

I couldn't help but smiling at this.  A friend has called it "multilayered" instead of "sloppy word choice". And he seems to enjoy it just as much as the more straightforward and precise style.


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 22

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 4:55pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hong, there are things that are worse than sloppy word choice; for example, sloppy and/or nutty thinking are far worse. If you don't believe me, just try having a five minute conversation with an Anarcho-Libertarian.

George

(Edited by George W. Cordero on 2/25, 5:01pm)


Post 23

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 5:07pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
ahhh the advocates of force, out in the open. I suppose to enforce this law or regulation you'll need several govt agencies funded by money forced out of peoples pockets. Objectivism comes in that flavor?

Post 24

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 5:14pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Back to Deans challenge. I dont think it to be in my best interest to force anyone to help another in any situation. It is in my best interest to help those who matter to me. Not to force anything on anyone else.

John


Post 25

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 5:18pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hong in regards to post #13 its not a matter of interpretation. Forcing parents to force their kids to attend school, is a different matter entirely than education and life preparation (witness homeschooling).


John
(Edited by John Newnham
on 2/25, 5:20pm)


Post 26

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 5:23pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"acting irrationally will bring negative consequences on their own".

Not only! A drunk driver can kill you and me...and himself. ;-)

But you're REALLY helping the people who might be hurt by the drunk driver, helping him is just an unfortunate consequence.

I hope this doesn't get as out of hand as the last time drunk driving came up...

---Landon


Post 27

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 5:56pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
John,
Well, if we really want to pick on the wordings, "homeschool" has "school" in it, doesn't it? You don't mean that home-school does not need to be attended, do you?

George,
Thanks for the warning.

(Edited by Hong Zhang on 2/25, 6:02pm)


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 28

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 6:10pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
George, a short hijack.

I'd prefer discussions with the anarchists who post here and places like it to the ones I've had the most experience talking with

punk.jpg

---Landon


Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Post 29

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 7:45pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
There is something I have never understood with most Objectivists and that is a lack of integrating the big picture. Human nature, realism, experience, results, introspective awareness, comprehension, hierarchy, logic, aim, etc should, at least in my view, go into validating hypothetical problems. Logic and the concept of non-initiation of force are only part of the O picture. Teenagers and children often make unreasonable requests and it is not unreasonable to say "no". End point. Brick wall.

Until the roads are privatized and the private owners of the roads or the insurance companies are responsible for the accidents from drunk drivers I don’t find any problem police with yanking drunk drivers off the roads, actually I have no problem with anyone doing that!

(Edited by Newberry on 2/25, 7:47pm)


Post 30

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 8:01pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Were you here for the last drunk driving discussion fiasco?

---Landon


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 31

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 8:08pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Until the roads are privatized and the private owners of the roads or the insurance companies are responsible for the accidents from drunk drivers I don’t find any problem police with yanking drunk drivers off the roads, actually I have no problem with anyone doing that!
Ya'know what? I don't either! 



Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 32

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 8:22pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ok I'll break down the last fiasco.  I and several others agreed that drunk driving laws were good in the context of noticably impaired driving but checkpoints were straight evil.

The other side was saying this should be a libertarian hot-button issue and we needed to protect the "right" to drive drunk.

Again this would be moot under a free gov't.... etc etc... privatized roads... etc... but I don't think drunk driving laws should be heavily enforced on drivers who haven't proved themselves impaired (ie swerving through lanes, inconsistant speed, etc)

That's the cliff notes version.

---Landon  


Post 33

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 9:28pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Oh, okay. Thanks.

And to be honest, I'm not, nor have I ever been, nor can I conceive of ever in the future being in favor of 100% privatization of roads.


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 34

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 9:31pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I have a relevant experience to forcing someone’s hand to do right.

Awhile ago went I gave tennis lessons on the weekends, to such people P. Sampras, my teaching court was directly behind an adjacent club’s golf course green. Periodically golf balls came whizzing into the court from behind me. With a few seconds notice you could hear them coming, and manage to duck in the last second. This understandably worried me especially being all day on that court. I called the golf club and talked with manager about it but nothing was done about moving the green.

I knew my days were numbered, one of the golf balls had my name on it. I thought of calling the police but I thought that they could only warn the club and wouldn’t be able to help. I figured an alternative approach; I called the manager again and told him if they did not move the green immediately I would contact their insurance provider and loge a complaint with them. Of course, if after I documented that and a golf ball did hit me or anyone else, the financial repercussions would be astronomical for the golf club.

The green was moved within 24 hours.

Michael


Post 35

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 9:43pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Wow, Michael, that was pretty smart!
It's just  blatantly irresponsible of the golf course to not even put up a net to catch stray balls. Would have been a whole lot cheaper than moving the green too.


Post 36

Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 10:33pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I meant initiation of force. I'll restate my question.

Provide me with a situation where it is in a Person's rational self interest to initiate force against an individual to make sure that they help another (especially when no one is forcing the Person to do so).

Post 37

Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 6:29amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Dean!

Ok, if my above plan didn't work, and I couldn't see any other legal redress,  I would have secretly subotoged the green. That would qualify for the hypothetical that you insist on. Actually I have done something like that in Greece....hahaahha, which also worked.

Michael


Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Post 38

Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 7:25amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Your own Boston Tea Party, Michael?

//;-)

Michael


Post 39

Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 7:43amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Michael,

An excellent example, the Boston Tea Party! That, in part, forced people into a revolution!!! And we got to benefit from that.

Michael


Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.