Should we regard morality as objective or subjective? In today‘s Friday Philosophy, Dr. David Gordon looks at the writings of Timothy Williamson, who argues that we can see morality in an objective light. On that point, he would agree with Murray Rothbard.
Long before the term "Critical Race Theory" was coined, Ludwig von Mises already was critiquing what he called "racial polylogism," which claims that what passes for truth depends upon racial identity. While people might hold different perspectives, truth still is truth.
Long before the term "Critical Race Theory" was coined, Ludwig von Mises already was critiquing what he called "racial polylogism," which claims that what passes for truth depends upon racial identity. While people might hold different perspectives, truth still is truth.
When great ones err, they often err greatly. Such was the case with Albert Einstein, who mastered quantum physics but whose view on economics were, well, unscientific.
Modern egalitarians play down the idea of free will, claiming that free will is relevant only if individuals have no interference with their choices. Murray Rothbard, on the other hand, recognized that self-ownership and one's ability to engage in reason is enough to recognize free will.
Modern egalitarians play down the idea of free will, claiming that free will is relevant only if individuals have no interference with their choices. Murray Rothbard, on the other hand, recognized that self-ownership and one's ability to engage in reason is enough to recognize free will.
Modern mainstream economics bases its theories on utilitarianism. Murray Rothbard, on the other hand, saw economic law as based in natural law. Furthermore, he rejected the legal positivism of our age, again deferring to the law of nature.
The simple tautology that individuals act is not trivial, despite what critics of Austrian economics might say. As Mises noted, human action is directly related to the ability of humans to reason.
In his latest book, Late Admissions: Confessions of a Black Conservative, Glenn Loury engages in what David Gordon calls an argument by fiat. While Loury makes a good faith effort to explain his points, his logic is nonetheless lacking.
As Murray Rothbard noted, reason is a powerful tool to help us discern how to thrive in our world. Government, through propaganda and interference with education, seeks to stifle reason and replace it with obedience to the state.
