I’m new, and not new (I’ve taken a nom de guerre). In any case, I never introduced myself before, so…
I’m an ancap, and my chief influences are Aristotle, David Hume, von Mises, and Rothbard.
I just started a new Mises Community blog, and I’m writing a series of posts on the history of epistemological thought, which I introduce in the following posts:
Epistemology in History
Epistemology in (Western) History: From Hesiod to Hoppe.
I am currently discussing the epistemological thought of the ancient Greek poet Hesiod.
The Inspiration of Hesiod introduces the poet.
The following six posts summarize his mythological and cosmological poem the Theogony.
Introducing the Theogony
The Cosmology of Hesiod
History in the Theogony
Human Nature in the Theogony
Ethics in the Theogony
And the last three posts search for an implied epistemology in the Theogony.
The Epistemology of Divine Poetry
Hesiod and Aristotelean Demonstration
Night, Day, and Induction
Next, I will discuss Hesiod’s other great work, the Works and Days.
I look forward to the bounty of intellectual stimulation I know is on offer here with you all.
that’s interesting, how did both David Hume and Aritotle influence you? I would think they would both be jarring to the mind if they were both believed mainly because hume was such a radical a posteriorist as opposed to aristotle’s apriorism.
Thanks. Aristotle had one of the most synoptic minds in history. We are all poorer for the anti-Aristotelean revolt of post-medieval scholarship in the Protestant west.
Thanks, wilderness. I’ve been tempted to wade into the natural rights debate between you-and-Liberty-Student and Donny with an A. But I thought I had better get my epistemology squared away first.
I’m going to go into that in detail when my history of epistemology series of posts reaches Aristotle and Hume. But, basically I’m influenced by Hume’s philosophy of mind and Aristotle’s basic teleological analysis of human nature, his taxonomy of concepts, and the application of his formal logic to economics. I’ll try to square that circle in my blog. Also, I believe Aristotle is not nearly as a prioristic as he is often characterized, and that Hume’s a posteriorism is not as crude as many think. Aristotle was no Cartesian rationalist, and Hume was no Schmollerite/positivist.
I’ve already started to read you blog posts linked through the forum here. Good reads. Though I’m itchin’ to know how you view natural rights, maybe best not to bring that up yet. Not to debate, but curious since you brought that up as to what insight you may offer. [:D]
Yeah, I’ll eventually get to ethics on my blog. But, very briefly, I definitely don’t accept Donny’s moral fictionalism. I’m definitely in the natural rights camp. But I differ from your average Rothbardian in that I believe (and this is where my Humeanism comes in) that morality springs from the passions, and not from reason. I know that’s another circle to square: but it makes sense in my head, and I’ll do my best to make it make sense on “paper” after I discuss epistemology, human nature, and economics.
For the past year and a half, I’ve been writing and working under a pen name: J. Grayson Lilburne. As a promoter of anarcho-capitalism, having a degree of anonymity has provided a sense of security in this state-haunted world. But the downsides of having a sundered life have outweighed the upsides. So, I’ve decided to go back to my given name: Daniel James Sanchez. You can call me Danny. My email address is still the same as the one I’ve been using for a while (the one based on Mises’ motto): tunecede@gmail.com
Here’s to a great new year for the Mises Institute, the Mises Community, and the cause of liberalism!
Does revealing your name (Daniel James Sanchez) change anything about what you said using the pseudonym J. Grayson Lilburne? What costs outweighed the benefits of anonymity?
