Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site randvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!randvax!edhall
From: edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: libertarianism VS economic reality
Message-ID: <2150@randvax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 28-Nov-84 16:25:28 EST
Article-I.D.: randvax.2150
Posted: Wed Nov 28 16:25:28 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Dec-84 19:25:33 EST
Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica
Lines: 21

I've been following the discussion of libertarianism here for a while
(only recently reverting to the ``n'' key as the discussion turns
circular or becomes semantic nit-picking).  It often seems like those
arguing the ``pure'' libertarian position are committing the falacy
of asserting as an axiom the supreme moral goodness of personal freedom,
then using this axiom to ``prove'' the relative badness of all other
points of view.

Remember that something taken as an axiom is taken as a matter of
faith.  Not everyone sees personal freedom as the highest good.  I
might feel that other things, such as the health of society in
general, are at least as important, and perhaps in some cases *more*
important than absolute personal freedom.  And someone who tries to
prove to me the virtue of a point of view based on an axiom I don't
accept is simply wasting time.

Here, as in many places, deciding ``who's right'' or ``who's wrong''
depends upon ``whose rules'' are used...

		-Ed Hall
		decvax!randvax!edhall