I don’t really understand Argumentation Ethics as written in Hoppe’s essay. I tend to agree with people in the Polycentric order blog that arguing implies self-ownership in the ontological sense but does not imply it ethically( What if the person arguing chooses to be a slave?). Also, how is argume…

Just4kix, is it possible to argue that other people should be enslaved against their consent? Yes, but then it would fail the test of ethics (universality). This is no better than saying some laws are for some men only, which contradicts the meaning of the word law.

Well am I right to think that argumentation ethics says that self-ownership is established through speech? If that is correct then how can it be truly self ownership if you are under the will of someone who is constantly torturing you? Does argumentation ethics make a distinction between de facto a…

Who are his ‘slaves’? Involuntary or voluntary workers? No idea. Just saying – an argument between a slave-owner and a slave should be impossible under argumentation ethics. Z.

then why go on without reading the material yourself, listening to those that have, developing an idea, and providing an argument that is relevent?

then why go on without reading the material yourself, listening to those that have, developing an idea, and providing an argument that is relevent? Why bother… when everything is subjective. AAhhhh right? [N] lol

It’s an exercise in self-control, not necessarily in self-ownership. This observation should pique curiosity that something is odd here, but in fact what seems like an error I am pointing out is not necessarily one. For anyone interested in following along, below I demonstrate that the issue of whe…

If you are exercising self-control in violation of the public ownership of your body, then that is also a performative contradiction.

False dichotomy: self-ownership vs. public ownership To see the two options more clearly: “One (objectively) ought to have exclusive control over oneself” vs. “One (objective) ought to NOT have exclusive control over oneself” The reason that’s a false dichotomy is that there is another option, na…

How is arguing with somebody supposed to prove private property rights???

Economics Economics Questions

Amanojack December 8, 2009, 11:35pm 33

Well, it depends on what you mean by a theory of ethics. Certainly meta-ethical theories are still possible, such as Mises’s utilitarianism.

Topic		Replies	Views
A friendly introduction to Hoppe's Argumentation Ethics Political Theory hoppe , argumentation-ethics , hans-herman-hoppe , ethical-apriorism	240	35125	January 13, 2012
Argumentation Ethics is Bad Argumentation Political Theory	66	21549	January 1, 2012
Private Property Rights (or How Hoppean Argumentation Ethics Proves Natural Rights) General anarchism , natural-rights , hans-hermann-hoppe , argumentation-ethics , private-property	11	4907	October 9, 2008
Non-Agression Principle Political Theory	15	4857	August 1, 2011
Argumentation Ethics, help me out General	23	6436	July 27, 2012

How is arguing with somebody supposed to prove private property rights???

Related topics

Related on the wiki