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