| Self Ownership - www.mogulus.com/peacefreedomprosperity - 495 sec Philosophy of Liberty, Self Ownership www.mogulus.com/peacefreedomprosperity
This philosophy is based on the principle of self-ownership. You own your life. To deny this is to imply that another person has a higher claim on your life than you have. No other person, or group of persons, owns your life nor do you own the lives of others.
"You exist in time: future, present, and past. This is manifest in life, liberty, and the product of your life and liberty. The exercise of choices over life and liberty is your prosperity. To lose your life is to lose your future. To lose your liberty is to lose your present. And to lose the product of your life and liberty is to lose the portion of your past that produced it.
"A product of your life and liberty is your property. Property is the fruit of your labor, the product of your time, energy, and talents. It is that part of nature that you turn to valuable use. And it is the property of others that is given to you by voluntary exchange and mutual consent. Two people who exchange property voluntarily are both better off or they wouldn't do it. Only they may rightfully make that decision for themselves.
"At times some people use force or fraud to take from others without willful, voluntary consent. Normally, the initiation of force to take life is murder, to take liberty is slavery, and to take property is theft. It is the same whether these actions are done by one person acting alone, by the many acting against a few, or even by officials with fine hats and titles.
"You have the right to protect your own life, liberty, and justly acquired property from the forceful aggression of others. So you may rightfully ask others to help protect you. But you do not have a right to initiate force against the life, liberty, or property of others. Thus, you have no right to designate some person to initiate force against others on your behalf.
"You have a right to seek leaders for yourself, but you have no right to impose rulers on others. No matter how officials are selected, they are only human beings and they have no rights or claims that are higher than those of any other human beings. Regardless of the imaginative labels for their behavior or the numbers of people encouraging them, officials have no right to murder, to enslave, or to steal. You cannot give them any rights that you do not have yourself.
"Since you own your life, you are responsible for your life. You do not rent your life from others who demand your obedience. Nor are you a slave to others who demand your sacrifice. You choose your own goals based on your own values. Success and failure are both the necessary incentives to learn and to grow. Your action on behalf of others, or their action on behalf of you, is only virtuous when it is derived from voluntary, mutual consent. For virtue can only exist when there is free choice.
"This is the basis of a truly free society. It is not only the most practical and humanitarian foundation for human action, it is also the most ethical.
"Problems that arise from the initiation of force by government have a solution. The solution is for people of the world to stop asking officials to initiate force on their behalf. Evil does not arise only from evil people, but also from good people who tolerate the initiation of force as a means to their own ends. In this manner, good people have empowered evil throughout history.
"Having confidence in a free society is to focus on the process of discovery in the marketplace of values rather than to focus on some imposed vision or goal. Using governmental force to impose a vision on others is intellectual sloth and typically results in unintended, perverse consequences. Achieving the free society requires courage to think, to talk, and to act—especially when it is easier to do nothing." Tags: peace Freedom Prosperity Ron Paul Constitution War Pro Peace Love Liberty Politics mccain obama clinton  | | | | Declaration of self-ownership - 146 sec Nobody has any right to forcefully rule over my body and my possessions. Not you, not your representative and not the supermajority of any arbitrary group.
No part of the market should be violently monopolized by anyone, in any area. Not education, not healthcare, not roads and especially not arbitration, security and banking.
You should always question the morality of your actions. If you don't question the morality of your actions, then you are part of the problem.
Anyone making excuses for institutionalized violence is part of the problem.
A state is a violently acquired and held monopoly on violence, in a certain area. This is immoral. Democracy gives the state a cloak of legitimacy. But this is entirely false. The state and it's ruling class would never adopt voting if it would not serve it's own political goals. Democracy is a scam and is no better than any other state organization. A good way of showing your disapproval of the SYSTEM is to not vote. Voting between Stalin and Hitler is not freedom.
Stop believing in groups. Groups have NO moral content. There are only individuals and there are only actions of individuals. Judge people on their actions and NOTHING else.
For example: leaders of countries have usually never killed anyone. They often sign papers and declare wars, but they don't actually kill people. The soldiers in the armies however are willing to carry out murders in return for money. Do not support people who are willing to kill other people outside of pure self-defense. The war in Iraq is EVIL and the problem lies with the soldiers. Tags:anarcho capitalism market anarchy libertarianism freedom liberty voluntary society introduction tremblay hellbound | | | | | | | | | | Re: Self Ownership Theory - 239 sec the specific brain attached to the body which i control does think, but not independantly. the specific arm attached to the body which i control does move, but not independantly. the mind and pounds of flesh which i control act on my behalf. the arm attached to the body which i control would not move without my permission. we must then ask ourselves, what is my? my can not be matter. organic matter is the tool by which my manifests itself. my is the internal state that stakes complete unmitigated inherent proprietory rights to the pounds of flesh attached to me. there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that this authoritarian proprietary relationship is appropriated to my by any external third party. it is inherent. you see, it is impossible to even argumentatively challenge the theory of self ownership without implicity presuming the theory to be correct.
if someone punches you in the face. what is responsible? the fist, the arm, the brain, or the sovereign independant individual who utilized all three organic mechanisms acting on behalf of the internal state of himself? the responsibility for the actions of his body rests with his internal state.
to say that the individual does not own himself is to state that the individual is not responsible for the actions of his body. if his fist is not his, if his brain is not his, and if his body are not his, then he is not responsible for the act of punching you in the face because nothing of his planned or perpetrated the act. since he is able to control these organic mechanisms however, he is responsible for the act because he made a conscious decision to commit it. with inherent control comes responsibility, and you can simply not be responsible for that which is not yours. you own the pounds of flesh because you inherently control it, and are therefore responsible for its actions.
all morality rests upon the foundation that every individual owns himself, and the reality of his self ownership justifies its existence in the individual manifestation of will. self ownership is as evident a naturally occuring phenomenon as the observation that grass is alive because it grows.
even if the self ownership theory is a complete and utter distortion of reality. socialism is not the logical conclusion to the absence of ownership because socialism is a theory which presumes third party ownership. what is the evidence or the rational argument that a third party owns you? if there is no self ownership, there is no ownership, and if a third party does not own you, it therefore can not rightfully impose upon you its will. Tags: self ownership individualism morality metaphysics | | | | Self-Ownership is a meaningful concept - 274 sec Really.
My brand of emergentism:
**Physical monism**
Entities existing or coming
into being in the universe consist solely of material parts. Likewise, properties, dispositions,
behaviors, or structures classified as
emergent are instantiated by systems consisting exclusively of physical parts.
******************
The three features of weak emergentism—
(i) the thesis of physical monism
(ii) the thesis of systemic properties
and (iii) the thesis of
synchronic determination
—, however, are compatible with contemporary reductionist approaches without further ado. Some champions of weak emergentism credit the compatibility of emergence and reducibilityas one of its merits compared to stronger versions of emergentism.
Fat man bitches about mild annoyances for your viewing pleasure. Tags: libertarianism self ownership anarchism youtube philosophy of mind dichotomy emergentism paul mckeever |
|
