tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post1505158564808024243..comments2024-03-29T02:29:03.388-07:00Comments on Edward Feser: Libertarian neutrality so-calledEdward Feserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13643921537838616224noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-91785048373198406352009-10-13T15:53:11.673-07:002009-10-13T15:53:11.673-07:00Edward--As for the neutrality issue, a lot of this...Edward--As for the neutrality issue, a lot of this assesment depends on where you start the whole political structure. You have to start with some givens. Complete neutrality amounts to little more than an abstract painting of solid colors. Who is going to gather it all together? Howley, Seavey, and McCarthy are aiming their analysis at that truth. When the society is established, then we can sit back and watch all the moral and philosophical neutrality. So, that is why your case for conservative morals legislation must indeed be defensible! How far back are we going to go--respecting political philosophy--, to the concepts themselves? No. You can't have your cake and eat it, too. Ultimately, I opine, you can have a lot of neutrality regnant, but then, the "mess," as you put it, requires an awful lot of mediating to catch the nearer way. Stimulating discussion.Fredericnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-64739463692017303272009-10-13T04:43:52.800-07:002009-10-13T04:43:52.800-07:00Thanks!Thanks!CrimsonCatholichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08623996344637714843noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-44304439555085009282009-10-12T22:32:51.142-07:002009-10-12T22:32:51.142-07:00Hello CC,
Sorry, I did see it but haven't had...Hello CC,<br /><br />Sorry, I did see it but haven't had time for a substantive reply -- but I do tend to share your reaction to Bradshaw's position.<br /><br />Hello Deuce,<br /><br />Absolutely spot on, my friend.Edward Feserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13643921537838616224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-56307603706758011932009-10-12T13:45:36.772-07:002009-10-12T13:45:36.772-07:00Hi, Ed. I've thought for a while that libertar...Hi, Ed. I've thought for a while that libertarian (particularly socially liberal libertarianism) is unresolvably inconsistent. On the one hand, the main point of libertarianism is supposedly to remove government coercion from our lives as much as possible. It presents itself as the very antithesis of totalitarianism.<br /><br />On the other hand, left-wing libertarians frequently want to remove all coercion and social pressure exerted by society as well, a project that requires lots of government interference.<br /><br />Libertarian support for gay marriage is perhaps the best example. Marriage is an institution that pre-exists our government. It was created in its present form by an organic society, and is supported by tradition and culture. The government merely recognizes the institution, because it's such a fundamental and integral part of our society that it would be practically impossible for it not to.<br /><br />To institute gay marriage is to remove the marriage institution as defined by society, and to replace it with a government-defined "institution". The resulting institution is no longer government-recognized, but government-invented.<br /><br />The essence of the totalitarian agenda is to destroy all natural traditions and institutions, and to immerse people entirely in a social reality defined and controlled by the state, so that there is nothing outside or above the state to which they may hold allegiance.<br /><br />To replace marriage and the family with a state-defined reality is basically the Holy Grail of totalitarianism, because the family (and marriage) is the single most central institution in <i>all</i> functioning societies. All totalitarian states seek out ways of interfering with marriage and family, in order to remove them as potential competitors for people's loyalty.<br /><br />In short, you'd think that the egregious state imposition into the fabric of society required for gay marriage (something that would never exist on its own), would be about the most anti-libertarian thing imaginable. And yet, you've got lots of libertarians promoting it. The idea that the government shouldn't insinuate itself into society has come into conflict with the idea that everyone should be allowed to do what they want, and it has lost in the libertarian's mind.<br /><br />In fact, left-wing libertarianism isn't an alternative to egalitarianism at all. It is, in fact, identical to it. Like the egalitarian, the left-libertarian claims that all human desires are equal, but when peoples' desires come into conflict with each other, it turns out that some are more equal than others, and the government gets called in to endorse the "good" (ie, leftist) desires and suppress the "bad" (conservative) ones.The Deucehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09664665914768916965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-12671093083315342952009-10-12T10:59:32.864-07:002009-10-12T10:59:32.864-07:00This one hits home for me particularly, because it...This one hits home for me particularly, because it was exposure to Nozick's theories at Harvard Law School that provided much of the impetus for me to enter the Church. I arrived at the same conclusion you did: as nice as it would be for this to end up being the answer, there's no way it could possibly be. About halfway through law school, I came to the jarring realization that it was turtles all the way. I couldn't get answers to these questions because there weren't any.<br /><br />It was then that I felt called to attend Fr. Savage's seminar on basic beliefs being given at St. Paul's, which was the first time I actually heard a detailed explanation of what it meant for God to be a Trinity. I said to myself afterward "Looks like you got your answer." <br /><br />BTW, just in case it got lost in the comboxes and you hadn't seen it, I left a comment on the "Four Approaches to Teleology" post regarding an essay by David Bradshaw that I think will interest you. If you don't have time to respond, I completely understand.CrimsonCatholichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08623996344637714843noreply@blogger.com