Perhaps next time you write a post you could put a bit more effort into coming up with something that's actually worth communicating.
Why are you focusing on so heavily on whether it's "rational"? He said that it's an irrational, politically extremist position. The whole statement is what I was replying to.
>Full strength, axiomatic, dismantle-the state libertarianism is impractical. If your central example of libertarianism is b...(read more)
I don't see how this is a reply to my question. Being impractical doesn't mean something is irrational and politically extremist. If you look at the comment thread, you'll see that I'm reacting to a certain poster deciding to quit posting on Less Wrong due to "politically extremist" ideologies, wher...(read more)
I'm open to a continuing conversation. Your post just gave me the impression that you weren't trying to read my writing in a careful manner. To be honest, the number of punctuation oddities and unusual phrasings in your post made me believe you simply didn't care about the discussion. This is a rath...(read more)
The evolutionary process produced humans, and humans can create certain things that evolution wouldn't have been able to produce without producing something like humans to indirectly produce those things. Your question is no more interesting than, "How could humans have built machines so much faster...(read more)
You're not putting in very much effort to have a deep discussion.
>It just sounds like you're saying that the final authority gets decided at run-time, based on whoever happens to have the most financial power.
That's just one of the many possibilities.
>Why do you think this is preferable to a system where authority is agreed upon beforehand by a majority of th...(read more)
I described what it feels from the inside to run into philosophical skepticism. It's simply where your ability to engage in manual reasoning hits its limit, but you press onward and overheat your brain. The final antidote to this issue is to simply realize exactly what happened.
The feeling of phil...(read more)
In certain cases people can pattern-match sociopath by looking at someone's face. I didn't mean to suggest the average person can do it on a consistent basis.
Many people who delve into the deep parts of analytical philosophy will end up feeling at times like they can't justify anything, that definite knowledge is impossible to ascertain, and so forth. It's a classic trend. Hume is famous for being a "skeptic", although almost everyone seems to misunderst...(read more)