On Argumentation Ethics

I understand that Hans Hoppe’s Argumentation Ethics as not saying that self-ownership is true, rather, that anyone arguing anything accepts self-ownership as true by their “performance.” To argue against self-ownership is then a performative contradiction, but only for the one doing so. And if you have a desire to “get along” with others and to find a peaceful way to allocate resources in a world of scarcity, then you’ll accept self-ownership, and ultimately individualistic property rights. If you don’t have such a desire, than you become a “technicality”, like a raging tiger, and may be dealt with on the same ethical grounds. If you don’t respect the self-ownership and property rights of others, they have no reason to respect yours (that you clearly don’t believe in). And that’s today’s two cents.

Skyler.

Save as PDFPrint
Liked it? Support this contributor on Patreon!
Skyler J. Collins (Editor)

Written by 

Founder and editor of Everything-Voluntary.com, Skyler is a husband and unschooling father of three beautiful children. His writings include the column series “One Voluntaryist’s Perspective” and “One Improved Unit,” and blog series “Two Cents” and “Items of Note.” Skyler also wrote the books No Hitting! and Toward a Free Society, and edited the books Everything Voluntary and Unschooling Dads. You can hear Skyler chatting away on the official Everything-Voluntary.com podcast.

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of