Friday Philosophy

In my view the language of “homesteading” of persons (i.e., children) is best abandoned. Retaining it causes confusion, and nothing essential to the theory is lost by giving it up.

William Graham Sumner did not believe in "social Darwinism" as his critics think, but rather that to survive, people must organize themselves in a society. Sumner is right.

Many say economics must focus on preserving resources for distant future generations. They say climate change is why. That's may seem convincing in the abstract, but we soon learn how hard it is to predict future needs, and to ignore present ones.

Given that so much of the world is in the grip of false ideologies, what can we do? Mises says that the answer does not lie in international organizations or treaties. “It is futile to place confidence in treaties, conferences, and…bureaucratic outfits" 

Manent insists that if political leaders don’t lead society, we will have a society that isn’t led by political leaders. So what?

Many support democracy because for them the collective or “republican” liberty they favor far exceeds individual liberty in importance. Those of us who follow Mises and Rothbard will disagree.

Mises defends praxeology using philosophical minimalism, that is, by sticking to the core fact that people act and make choices.

Though he was generally a Ricardian, John Stuart Mill thought that the main obstacle to socialism is that people might not yet be civilized enough to put it into practice. 

Hurting innocents is never okay, but apologists for the bombing of Hiroshima and other state atrocities find this "purist" position inconvenient.