cynicist

Ah now I understand. I missed this earlier post. Please reread the part of your quote that I bolded. What you call 'self-control' IS self-ownership. When libertarians/anarchists say that self-ownership is an axiom, what they mean is that it is a self-evident truth. (descriptive, not prescriptive) The other "axioms" you described are just language manipulations. So rather than say that you "own" the body they say that you "use" it. Well guess what, ownership is having control over something, like the body. How is an individuals well being a benchmark for science and morality? How is it a matter of preference to begin with? These things are supposed to be universal...

Ownership had to be taken through an investment of labor. Surely you accept that there is a difference between the production of something and it's destruction? Is it incoherent now? I mean even today I could buy some property and then say that anyone who steps foot on it owes me $1000000 dollars. Yet somehow society functions without worrying about this. Because our actions matter? I own my body which means I own my actions and their effects. Property is one of those effects (the result of an action, labor), as is the destruction I do to the property of others. I take an action which produces something, then I own that something. If I stumble over rocks or breathe air, I own (am responsible for is more clear) the disturbance of those things but I didn't produce the rocks or the air. The disturbance was incidental, not purposeful. It's not a coincidence that all of your examples so far have been in that category. (like accidentally creating ash) So tell me, do you think bumping into things accidentally is difficult to distinguish from purposeful action like labor? That is the argument that you are making for why what I'm saying makes no sense. By the way, I was only guessing as to the illusion thing. Care to answer my question about your approach to the things in your proximity? (I'm just imagining this hilarious comic where someone picks up your phone by mistake and you try to explain to them how you would prefer that they return the phone to its prior location because that would make it more convenient for you to use ) (Sidenote: I'm trying really hard to resist getting into the UPB/morality debate ><) Edit: Nevermind Your statement (1) doesn't make sense logically. If morality exists it must be universal, which means it exists independently of people's goals in the same way that truth does, even though they are both optional. Here's what you said with truth as a substitute, it may make it clearer: 1 - There is no set of goals that everyone should have. Therefore, there is no common standard of truth that people should apply because people will have different goals. There is no way to prove that people should have the same goals. Not having a common set of goals makes it impossible for people to believe in a common standard of truth.

You don't have full control over the situation due to being forced by someone else at gunpoint. That's not the same as not having control over your body. The fact that any of this needs to be explained is hard for me to believe. Yeah, definitely trollish.

No. You are confusing the situation of affecting someone else's property with creating your own. The reason you don't take ownership of the bike or glass in those examples is because someone else already owns them. Lol yes it does. You invested labor into creating it. Absolutely. They own the creation of the fire and are responsible (have ownership/control over) for the results. Starting a fire by accident is not the same as investing labor into building something is it? But for the sake of example lets say someone burned their property to the ground because they were insane and preferred ashes to grass. If someone vandalized ashes (further destruction) wouldn't you thank them? Because in this reality apparently destruction is preferable to preservation. Changing molecules is so general that it is meaningless. How exactly does breathing air or walking across sand (both incidental) have anything to do with ownership of things that you invest time/energy into creating? I'm curious if you live by any of this. If no one owns anything they produce or trade for, do you just let people take the things that happen to be in your proximity, or let them live in the same shelter that you happen to be using? Or do you just say that you are "participating in the illusion"? Lol I'm having horrible flashbacks to debates on determinism. Ok guessing the answer is yes when it comes to participating in the illusion.

Do you have control over your emotions? The rate at which your heart beats? So clearly you don't have full control over every aspect of your body. (not sure why you brought up flying)

Mises Regression Theorem explains how currency first came to exist and be used. Obviously it has to have value for people to be willing to trade things for it and that's why it was natural for things like gold to be used as currency. Then as people learned what properties were most important for a currency to have, certain commodities (precious metals) rose above others. Think about this for a second, what use was gold thousands of years ago? It was pretty and that's why it was valuable. It only proved so popular as money due to its other properties (divisibility, scarcity, etc) Bitcoin was designed with those qualities in mind from the start, and comes with some additional utility in the form of cryptographic signing for contracts, low transfer costs, and so on. So just like gold it started out relatively obscure and useless as a kind of nerdy hobby but gathered momentum through trade and the spread of its use, and now can be seriously considered as a currency. A commodity is defined as something of use or value or an article of trade. Bitcoin seems to fit either of those fine.

You are mistaken when you say that you obviously do not have exclusive control over it. It's exclusively a product of your actions. (until you trade it or whatever) Your body is similar, in that you sustain it through your actions. Are you saying that this doesn't mean anything because someone else can claim that they produced it? Or that someone can steal it? If so, how is that any different than me smashing a window and saying that greekredemption did it. That doesn't mean that I'm no longer responsible for smashing the window, just because people believe otherwise. Descriptive I wasn't thinking of that example at all (lmao) but exactly. Taking someone else's property and claiming exclusive ownership doesn't mean it's suddenly yours, even if everyone around you believes it to be true. You can argue that it may as well be true (in effect) but that doesn't change the fact of the theft. I ran out of up votes but you are dead on. That's a very clear description of it. I think there may be some confusion around the words own, control, and exclusive that make this more complicated than it needs to be.

Exclusive control != Complete control over every aspect of your body What it means is that I alone control my body. If someone puts a gun to your head, you still maintain exclusive control over your body. They may be telling you what to do, but they aren't moving your hands for you. You are confusing several concepts together. If I say I didn't have full control in a situation with a gun involved, that's true, but it's also true that you have exclusive control over your body in that situation.

You can't, but we have a biological attachment (babies are cute!) during that time.

Beautiful Fuck yeah! I was also raised in such a way (controlled/micromanaged) that I have to remind myself sometimes that I'm free to do anything I want, that I don't have to please others... and those thoughts amaze me. I get this strong sense of happiness and wonder when I think about how I can do absolutely anything and nothing if I want. That other people's opinions don't fundamentally matter. That's how foreign those things were to me when I was younger...

Are you sure about this? The meaning of own seems to be the same in all three to me. 1) You have control over your body 2) You therefore have control over your actions 3) The effects of which are therefore under your control (i.e. your responsibility). 4) So your ownership extends to that in material reality which falls under those effects. So if I break a window, I don't own the window, I own the damage that I caused because it is an effect of my actions. If I steal a bike, I own the theft, not the bike. Except there is a contradiction, because you do own the painting you produced. Without your actions it wouldn't even exist. You can sell it, give it away, abdicate ownership in many different ways but it doesn't change the fact that your actions are what created it in the first place and that's where the ownership comes from. (If you don't own the "effects of your actions" in the form of the painting, then who painted it? What other individual manipulated your body into producing it?) That's how I understand Stefan's argument anyway. Please let me know if I'm making a mistake somewhere. Also, welcome back

Right, you were saying there's nothing morally wrong about it and he interprets that as if you are fine with letting someone drown. I've experienced something similar when talking about morality and animal abuse... but that was with random online people. If someone I considered a friend said something that sounded that cold I'd want to be clear about it lol. Like wait, did you just say you would let someone drown? I'd be interested, because I don't see how you could reach an understanding unless his understanding of morality improves. He likely feels contempt over you describing his actions as immoral, since as you said he thought he was morally obligated to perform them.

Self-ownership is exclusive control over your body/mind. For it to be false you would either have to not have any control over your body/mind or someone else would have to be able to inhabit them or manipulate them in a freakish possession sort of way. I don't understand your last question, are you asking if there is a better word to use to describe it? I don't see why you are separating the mind from the body here, or what pain/feelings have to do with self-ownership. There is no self in a dead person, so talking about ownership there is pointless. Both a child and an insane person have self-ownership and exercise it. They don't have the same self-control or responsibility for their actions as a sane adult but those are different things.

Why did it get ugly?

Haha, I recognize your voice from a few call-in shows! Nice to put a voice to a face. Interesting video, but I would avoid mentioning emotional states around people you think are unreasonable. Saying something like, "you seem angry" is just going to make them defensive or provoke them to escalate.

Thanks for sharing but I'm already familiar with them, unfortunately there just aren't that many. Here's one of my favorite D&B tracks.

This artist was a caller on Fight, Flight, or Freeze!?!. I normally dislike rap/hip-hop as most of the time the lyrics are about stupid thug culture stuff but this guy is talented and thoughtful.

Ah that makes sense. In other words, when they describe things that make them happy they refer most often to personal benefits rather than say, things that they do for others. Using the word "define" here was throwing me off. Yeah the wording they chose concerned me as I thought they were trying to suggest that happiness comes from altruistic self-sacrifice, which is buddhist nonsense. What you said here makes sense and seems rational to me. When I see 'define happiness' my thought is: a pleasurable state of mind. If I were writing it I would choose something like 'what people think will make them happy' instead.

Haha agreed. There are also some posts in this thread that I thought about responding to but Stefan has covered the material well enough that I don't feel the motivation to do it. (Like the externalities argument, which Stefan has addressed in dozens of podcasts by now not to mention several books)

Very chill, I like it. Electronic music happens to be the largest part of my collection because of the variety. Something I've been addicted to recently:

Pretty much every forum I've ever visited has had this thread so I'm surprised I didn't see it here. We do have a liberty-themed one but I thought this one would be fun for people who just want to share whatever happens to be tickling their earbuds in the moment. I'll start (youtube links are encouraged, you can embed them by just pasting the youtube link into the chatbox)

I used to do the same, and manipulate people because I was afraid to be vulnerable. I think this is because we had to do this with our parents to survive since we couldn't leave, but now we can just stop seeing people if they harm us. So being honest just ends up giving us a clear answer quickly.

The development is in the characters, especially how they have changed in order to survive in the new world. I'm not sure what climax you can expect, it's not a mystery or thriller. Seems accurate lol. Anyway I am a fan of the show but the zombie aspect isn't particularly appealing (not a fan of the gore) so I'd prefer a post-apocalyptic-war setting but I really enjoy seeing how people are influenced by their beliefs/histories.

I'm curious about this myself. I've thought about going to one and imagined how different it might be, since I perceive many 'normal' people to be vaguely threatening and irrational. (and not really seeing me as a person but as an object they can use) I wonder if I would open up or shut down.... Where is that quote from? I like it.

Good topic. I'm careful about what I install on my phone or computer. I use Ubuntu instead of Windows (and try to use open-source software when possible) Keep my software updated (especially browser) Use browser addons to block ads and javascript (which is where a lot of malware comes from) Limit what personal information I give to websites (and don't use facebook) Don't use security questions (they are easier to guess than a password) or make up answers that people can't look up on a social networking profile. Use a VPN to encrypt my network traffic (most importantly when I'm using a public wifi network) I don't use cloud storage unless my stuff is encrypted or I don't care about it. Treat everything I do on the internet as public (unless I use encryption) Shred sensitive documents Avoid standing out in crowds lol (or in the presence of law enforcement)