Fracois: “(PROTIP: a 50 dollar bill is not a piece of paper, it’s money- its worth is not measured by it being a piece of paper. But of course this only applies if you believe in currency… otherwise your economic position just makes no sense.)”
You mean to say that value is subjective and, thus, the value of a $50 bill is subjective? Thanks for the news!
/thread
(or not)
So you don’t understand methodological individualism?
He’s charging you with contradicting methodological individualism by treating “the left” as an autonamous, homogenous entity. But to put the question of methodological individualism aside, this can also be summed up as: you’re overgeneralizing about the character of the people in a group. Which is kind of ironic, given the fact that the main complaint in this thread is precisely that the list of quotes (which I compiled, and I did put the names of the people the quotes were taken from at the bottom of my original blog post, and I didn’t purposefully send the link to either Tremblay or Carson) isn’t representative of all or many of the people here.
How am I doing the same thing? I’m not strawmanning left positions, I am saying they are irrational and illogical. And I would be happy to prove it.
Yeah, it was Carson, who sourced a blog post by someone with an axe to grind, who took the quotes out of context. I remember it now.
Not exactly intellectually rigorous, was it? But again, good luck getting people on the left to actually address what is fundamentally wrong with ancap positions. The typical attack is a strawman, the likes of which Carson piled on. He was looking for quotes to make his case, and he took whatever came, without even bothering to check the source or if he did, posting it knowing full well that much of it was out of context.
Methodological individualism denies that a collectivity is an autonomous decision-maker, and demands that the social sciences ground their theories in individual action
The left cannot practice anything, let alone intellectual dishonesty
None of the quotes are out of context, it’s simply that it’s hard to establish the context by mining through anchient forum posts. But if one does find the threads they were from, the context is quite clear. They were usually heated debates about various topics, and none of the quotes gain any particularly more nuanced meaning by looking at those threads.
In either case, I didn’t use the quotes as a representation of views that are inherent to ancap. What I did do was use them as an example of some ugliness that can be found in the libertarian movement, and especially this particular corner of it. It was particularly focused on the more conservative elements.
So the left can’t practice feminism, egalitarianism or socialism? Thanks for filling me in! Cool story bro!
I’m not surprised to see that LibertyStudent still either seriously miscomprehends what the people he argues with is saying or intentionally avoids it. Not much has changed. 
According to methodological individualism, they can’t. Because collectives don’t act.
They were out of context, we addressed this over a year ago when it was brought up here.
Yes, every time you lost a debate here, it was because no one understood you.
So you don’t understand what methodological individualism is. Do we need to split this off to a new discussion?
My point pertains to you specifically, as you tend to be uncivil with those who disagree with you, you very commonly misrepresent the views of your opposition, and quickly resort to personalizations.
Easy evidence exists in your interaction with the fellow above. A lot of snippy remarks and you aren’t addressing him.
I don’t see how anything in that thread can establish that the quotes are “out of context”. At best, you have people defending their social group, which is somewhat understandable but doesn’t really prove much. The only thing that could prove that they are out of context is the original threads, and I challenge anyone to look at those threads and conclude that the quotes don’t mean what they plainly say, without any further nuance being provided by the threads which they come from.
I’ll readily admit I have had my hot moments. However, when I make a claim, I back it up or I back down. Not all of us bail on discussions that we’re proven wrong in.
A lot of snippy remarks and you aren’t addressing him.
Honestly, 60-70% of the time, that’s all he does. And I am sure because of his authority here it makes others think he in fact has offered any rebuttal. Either way, I’m just here to learn, I learned pretty easy to let these argumentative tacticts slide
You know you’re grasping for straw (no pun intended) when you are quoting amateur forums instead of established literature.
You’re, rightfully, accusing Francois of taking quotes from individual members of the mises forums and treating this as though it was some kind of evidence against the entire group. You actually never said we’re illogical you said we’re dishonest, check your own post, and to claim the entire left is dishonest on the basis of this is just as much a hasty generalisation. Since you could never possibly meet the entire “left” you could never honestly make this assertion.
Re-read what I wrote, carefully. Better yet go read the actual article. He doesn’t attack ancap positions! The closest he comes is attacking Hoppean positions, based on an argument Hoppe has famously made (immigration restrictions), so there is no reason to get offended by it. Unless you are someone who agrees with this sort of “libertarian authoritarianism” the post has absolutely nothing to do with your beliefs.
He links to my profile, but I don’t believe any of those quotes are actually mine. I feel left out.
http://polycentricorder.blogspot.com/2008/12/why-i-dislike-hoppeans-and-libertarian.html