Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Libertarian Straddle: Rejoinder to Palmer and Sciabarra.Jeffrey Friedman - 1998 - Critical Review 12 (3):359-388.
    Abstract Palmer's defense of libertarianism as consequentialist runs afoul of his own failure to provide any consequentialist reasons for libertarian conclusions, and of his own defense of nonconsequentialist arguments for the intrinsic value of capitalism?cum?negative freedom. As suck, Palmer's article exemplifies the parasitic codependency of consequentialist and nonconsequentialist reasoning in libertarian thought. Sciabarra's defense of Ayn Rand's libertarianism is even more problematic, because in addition to the usual defects of libertarianism, Rand adds a commitment to ethical egoism that contradicts both (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • What's Not Wrong with Libertarianism: Reply to Friedman.Tom G. Palmer - 1998 - Critical Review 12 (3):337-358.
    Abstract In his critique of modern libertarian thinking, Jeffrey Friedman (1997) argues that libertarian moral theory makes social science irrelevant. However, if its moral claims are hypothetical rather than categorical imperatives, then economics, history, sociology, and other disciplines play a central role in libertarian thought. Limitations on human knowledge necessitate abstractly formulated rules, among which are claims of rights. Further, Friedman's remarks on freedom rest on an erroneous understanding of the role of definitions in philosophy, and his characterization of the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Self‐ and World‐Ownership: Rejoinder to Epstein, Palmer, and Feallsanach.Justin Weinberg - 1998 - Critical Review 12 (3):325-336.
    Abstract G. A. Cohen's argument against the claim that respect for self?ownership entails libertarianism features the imaginary example of ?Able and Infirm.? Richard Epstein, Tom Palmer, and Am Feallsanach criticize the example, but fail to rescue libertarianism from Cohen's attack. This is due to a misunderstanding of the role the example plays in Cohen's argument, and to a false belief that the initial ownership status of the world is important for resolving disputes in political philosophy.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark