Difference between revisions of "What Is Liberty?"
From Critiques Of Libertarianism
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
== Libertarians Avoid Saying What Liberty Is == | == Libertarians Avoid Saying What Liberty Is == | ||
| + | Libertarians are big on prescriptive (philosophically normative) descriptions of what they want as liberties. But they evade positive statements of what liberty IS. | ||
| + | |||
For example: | For example: | ||
* If you look in [[The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism]] by [[Ronald Hamowy]], there is no entry for liberty. | * If you look in [[The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism]] by [[Ronald Hamowy]], there is no entry for liberty. | ||
| Line 19: | Line 21: | ||
* [[Jason Brennan]], in ''[[Libertarianism: What Everyone Needs to Know]]'', arbitrarily selects one of the many definitions of "positive" and "negative" liberty, which he defines simplistically in terms of "power to do what one chooses" and "absence of obstacles". (p.26) | * [[Jason Brennan]], in ''[[Libertarianism: What Everyone Needs to Know]]'', arbitrarily selects one of the many definitions of "positive" and "negative" liberty, which he defines simplistically in terms of "power to do what one chooses" and "absence of obstacles". (p.26) | ||
* [[David Schmidtz]] and [[Jason Brennan]], in ''[[A Brief History of Liberty]]'', write "Here we categorize forms of liberty as much as our present purpose requires. We don't assume that there is any essence awaiiting our discovery; neither do we assume otherwise." They gloss over [[Gerald MacCallum]]'s [[Freedom as a Triadic Relation]] in a footnote, despite the fact the he unifies liberty with a model and dismisses the positive and negative distinctions the authors prefer. There is no mention of [[Hohfeld’s typology of rights]], and thus they conflate power, rights and liberty. | * [[David Schmidtz]] and [[Jason Brennan]], in ''[[A Brief History of Liberty]]'', write "Here we categorize forms of liberty as much as our present purpose requires. We don't assume that there is any essence awaiiting our discovery; neither do we assume otherwise." They gloss over [[Gerald MacCallum]]'s [[Freedom as a Triadic Relation]] in a footnote, despite the fact the he unifies liberty with a model and dismisses the positive and negative distinctions the authors prefer. There is no mention of [[Hohfeld’s typology of rights]], and thus they conflate power, rights and liberty. | ||
| + | * [[John Hospers]] in [http://public.callutheran.edu/%7Echenxi/phil315_101.pdf What Libertarianism Is] provides two contradictory sentences. "Each man has the right to liberty: to conduct his life in accordance with the alternatives open to him without coercive action by others." You might notice that he does not define liberty: he declares the one vague liberty that he wants. And of course it is foolish, because every right is coercive, including the rights to life, liberty, and property that he wants, and thus contradicts his demand for liberty. He also writes "The right to liberty: there should be no laws compromising in any way freedom of speech, of the press, and of peaceable assembly." A more specific liberty that he wants. But no definition of liberty. | ||
| + | |||
This absence of satisfactory definitions of liberty or freedom is typical of libertarian literature. The most libertarians seem to do is to arbitrarily declare that negative liberty is the only true liberty: but that does not explain other people's conceptions. | This absence of satisfactory definitions of liberty or freedom is typical of libertarian literature. The most libertarians seem to do is to arbitrarily declare that negative liberty is the only true liberty: but that does not explain other people's conceptions. | ||
| Line 57: | Line 61: | ||
* Everything you do or be has opportunity costs to others. They might be small, but they are still there. For example, others might be better off if you do not trampoline because they could instead. | * Everything you do or be has opportunity costs to others. They might be small, but they are still there. For example, others might be better off if you do not trampoline because they could instead. | ||
* There might be many different opportunity costs for others, and many different reasons why they refrain from interfering. For example, the trampoline owners don't interfere because they were bribed, while others don't interfere because of the government coercion of the property system (they could be taken to court) and still others just might not care because their opportunity costs are negligible. | * There might be many different opportunity costs for others, and many different reasons why they refrain from interfering. For example, the trampoline owners don't interfere because they were bribed, while others don't interfere because of the government coercion of the property system (they could be taken to court) and still others just might not care because their opportunity costs are negligible. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Why Is A Positive Model Important? == | ||
| + | It is called facing reality. Stating only prescriptive (philosophically normative) descriptions of what you want as liberties ignores the conditions needed to create them and the side effects of those liberties. A model helps reveal what is implicit in a liberty. That can have enormous practical consequences. This model, for example, shows why liberties cannot be unlimited: because of competition for limited external resources (R) and because of the need for reasons (B) for others not to interfere. | ||
== Confusion of Liberties with Rights == | == Confusion of Liberties with Rights == | ||
