Thank you for your participation and interest in the Mises Community. This software platform has seen its day, however, and so is now closed. We are redoing our entire site, so look for some exciting developments by the end of the year. Thank you for your support of Austrian economics, liberty, and peace.
"By the way, I wrote quite a long response to you that was lost here."
here= thread on why coercion is wrong.
Hello, I simply wanted to state formally that I am sorry for being so dogmatic in our conversation on morality. While I still think that Non-Aggressive morality is objective, universally true, and axiomatic, my approach was neither scholarly nor amiable; perhaps a reason is that I spend a lot of time discussing with Rothbardians, and have become accustomed to Libertarian morality as an implicit truth in every scenario. When I was challenged, therefore, I rather felt backed into a corner. (Not any falt of your own, of course, but my own shortcomings). And while my approach may perhaps be best in many scenarios, it was not the proper fashion to have discourse with a fellow intellectual such as yourself. I have begun reading my copy of Ethics of Liberty (as you may know, signed by Rothbard!), and I have realized that there are many ancillary reasons for supporting my own axioms. While an axiom is self-evident, that is no reason why it cannot be proven; for axioms are often built upon prior truths. I feel that my approach gave the wrong impression, and was deeply regrettable. Again, my sincere apologies.
By the way, I wrote quite a long response to you that was lost here. You may have seen the blank box at the time. Anyway, I was going to say that I do not necessarily feel I have been "kicked in the teeth intellectually," but I do feel that you have pointed out an obvious need for me to study a bit more. Thanks for pointing that out. I also feel that, on these forums, I am going to direct my energies to economics. I do not feel comfortable discussing morality with such vast opposition to my beliefs here. Fortunately, though, I have found such articles as "Rothbardian Ethics" by Hoppe, which help further my central tenets; there were many reasons I was neglecting in our discussion. I also believe that "Ethics of Liberty" will finally give me an entirely firm ground on which to base my statements (which, again, I will try to avoid here). Thanks once more for this progression in my intellectual development; if nothing else, you have helped me research my position, as well as the arguments against it. I hope we can talk about economics sometime too!
Hey, I saw your coment in the "is coercion wrong" thread, during your discussions with RothbardsDisciple, about Rothbard's chapter on monopoly in MES:"[Rothbard's] views in monopoly price (constituting the worst and most blatantly BS chapter of MES)"That's a pretty strong comment. I'm only on the first few chapters of MES, but what are your critcisms? Just wanted an opinion, I haven't even read it yet. I often find it useful to know the criticisms of something before I read it, so I can keep that in mind as I go through.
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue |
Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises