steven0461 comments on Survey Results - Less Wrong

48 Post author: Yvain 12 May 2009 10:09PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (210)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 13 May 2009 12:05:26PM *  10 points [-]

While labels like that are vague, libertarianism is in most versions highly deontologist ideology, and cares about processes and not results as such.

The libertarian writing I've seen is primarily consequentialist: arguments, mostly by economists, that governments produce worse results than people directing their own efforts for their own reasons. So I see no contradiction in the survey responses.

If, in the places I don't read, which are surely more numerous than those I do, libertarianism is mainly promoted by arguments that government is morally wrong, then I can see why the Libertarian party has never been more than a splinter movement.

Comment author: ciphergoth 13 May 2009 01:25:14PM 3 points [-]

FWIW, these have mostly been the arguments I've seen for libertarianism; that, and arguments which hinge on the importance of wealth going to the "deserving" over the "undeserving". If anyone can point me to any online writings on the subject which tackle the standard challenges to libertarian capitalism in a way that doesn't hinge on deontological ideas or ideas of deserving, I'd be interested to read them.

Comment author: steven0461 13 May 2009 07:29:16PM 4 points [-]

If anyone can point me to any online writings on the subject which tackle the standard challenges to libertarian capitalism in a way that doesn't hinge on deontological ideas or ideas of deserving, I'd be interested to read them.

No strong opinion on whether they're correct, but from what I've seen libertarians argue from consequences rather than deontology most of the time, so I have to wonder where you've been looking. As for pointers, there's a libertarian-leaning econ encyclopedia here.