From Critiques Of Libertarianism
|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | [[Category:Basics|850]] | + | <!-- you can have any number of categories here --> |
| − | {{DES | des = Libertarians believe many weird things about themselves compared to others.}} | + | [[Category:Issues]] |
| − | | + | [[Category:Fallacies Of Ideology]] |
| − | ; We libertarians are rational, they are not.
| + | [[Category:Descriptions Of Libertarianism]] |
| − | : People's thinking is based upon their values and premises. You cannot judge somebody else's rationality without adopting their values and premises for the judgement. There is very little evidence that libertarians do that, or judge fairly. Instead, the vulgar libertarian "logic" simply identifies that other people don't hold the same values or premises. | + | {{DES | des = Libertarians believe many weird things about themselves compared to others. Many are splendid examples of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect Dunning–Kruger effect]. See also: [[Derp]]. | show=}} |
| − | | + | <!-- insert wiki page text here --> |
| − | ; We understand the Constitution, they do not.
| + | <!-- DPL has problems with categories that have a single quote in them. Use these explicit workarounds. --> |
| − | : This attitude shows a profound ignorance of how the law ascribes meaning to documents such as the Constitution. First and foremost, the current meaning must take into account all subsequent legislation and court rulings. If I declared the elections of southern representatives to be invalid because they were apportioned too many seats (their black constituents should have been counted as 3/5 according to the Constitution), I would be laughed at because of my ignorance of the 14th amendment. Likewise if I ignore later judicial interpretations. Second, there must be one shared meaning, which requires social construction. If a libertarian swears that he is reading the meaning "literally", so may anybody else: you still require a social judgement of what the "literal" reading is. If you get as far as deciding that a "literal" reading is the appropriate way to understand the document. Third, general statements such as those in the Constitution have problems with precision and conflict with other statements in the same Constitution. Those problems have no clear, inerrant solution: they must be resolved by some interpretive authority.
| + | <!-- otherwise, we would use {{Links}} and {{Quotes}} --> |
| | + | {{List|title=Libertarian Self-Delusions|links=true}} |
| | + | {{Quotations|title=Libertarian Self-Delusions|quotes=true}} |
Latest revision as of 12:47, 12 October 2017
