"The censor believes that he can hold back the mighty traffic of life with a tin whistle and a raised right hand. For after all, it is life with which he quarrels." ~ Heywood Broun
Norms and the NAP
"There are many factors that may affect the analysis of ethical problems: the physical acts that occur, the relevant history, verbal communication, contracts, etc. One factor that can be difficult to incorporate is the role that socials norms play. This is because norms can vary widely between societies, and even within societies individuals are not usually consciously aware of the norms that they act upon. This paper examines how norms can effect ethical problems and gives one approach for investigating their effect."
0
Your rating: None
User Login
Search This Site
Recent comments
-
9 hours 43 min ago
-
10 hours 24 min ago
-
20 hours 14 min ago
-
23 hours 21 min ago
-
1 day 13 hours ago
-
1 day 14 hours ago
-
1 day 15 hours ago
-
2 days 23 hours ago
-
3 days 22 hours ago
-
4 days 6 hours ago
Root Strikers
Supporters
Merchandise
User Map
Latest Tweets
New recommended column on STR: Ten Reasons Why Libertarianism Is the Way of the Future http://t.co/kE9HDSOZCN
1 week 5 days ago
New recommended column on STR: Swarm Intelligence and Dynamics http://t.co/9PcrR0bEKR
1 week 6 days ago
New recommended column on STR: The Pope Joins the Chorus in Blaming Free Markets http://t.co/Z1ijEdco2x
2 weeks 1 day ago
- 1 of 40
- ››







Reprint Rights
Comments
Obviously the dialectical critical realism in this monograph may be seen under the aspect of Rothbardian-style strategic reversal of the unholy trinity of Aristotelean/Neitzschean/Randian provenance; of the Cartesian-Lockean-Humean-Kantian paradigm, of foundationalism (in practice, Platonic foundationalism) and irrationalism (in practice, capricious exercises of will-to-power or some other ideologically and/or psychosomatically buried source) new and old alike; of the primordial failing of pseudo-Objectivist philosophy, vulgar libertarian ontological monovalence, and its close ally, the epistemic fallacy within its ontic dual; Clearly s/he’s not read and/or internalized the libertarian canon and its complementary social science analog Austro-Agorian econometric (but non-parametric) statistical analysis.
But I do give Borer an “A” for effort though.