Aspiring Skywriter

Communism is about as utilitarian as I am, I would say. It introduces many non-utilitarian such as fairness of wages (talking about the exploitation of workers and so on), but definitely supports utilitarian solutions to those problems (ends justify means, etc.). So, "Kinda" is correct.

It's funny you mention this, I was thinking that some of the concepts thrown around in the movie mirror the language used by anti-leftists against the Left. An elite that thinks it knows better than the people it rules over, purity tests (based on inherited characteristics, too!), an experiment that's been running for a long time but has failed... Yeah. XD As for libertarian fiction....can't think of any offhand. I'll try to find some, in my brain or elsewhere. XD

Hume would actually agree with Harris, is the interesting bit. He basically outright said we can't really know the truth about reality for 100% certain. Harris and Hume would then probably agree that morality isn't certain, but that we can tell something about what people want based on what they say they want and don't want. People don't want to be robbed, and interpret that as wrong, so we can make the practical judgement that it's bad to rob people. Unfortunately, though, this isn't enough to allow for universal principles without relativism, since consistency can be achieved through multiple solutions.

Thanks. I'd say I'm currently on the left (Though a less anarchistic form of libertarianism is starting to appeal to me a bit more), with a sort of core philosophy towards maximizing positive freedom (i.e. the ability to do things), as opposed to the freedom from interference that is usually professed by libertarians, with certain exceptions plugged into the equation (Deliberate torture or mental degradation is never allowed under any circumstances, for instance, even if it could save lives and therefore increase the freedom of those who'd still be living). Former anti-feminist, now undecided on that front. I think that there's probably something to the pay gap but there's enough wiggle room that one could still question it, and so on. On immigration, I believe in equality of opportunity, which means that I believe in allowing people from third-world countries to come in in principle. However, arguments about the replacement rate, among other things, might sway me the other way, as an end to western culture doesn't benefit anyone, including the immigrants and other third-worlders.

I figure it's not so fitting for this forum. So I'll avoid that bit of fun for now. I'm looking forward to checking out what you have to say, and hell, maybe I'll call in on the show one day. Spirit of openness and debate and so on. Now, I'd like to make this intro a bit bigger as well, perhaps with a story about my arrival here, but honestly, there's not much to say. I was first introduced to Molyneux years ago when I was in Middle School, and though at the time I was learning about the philosophy of libertarianism/objectivism/anarchism from other sources, I liked the style of his old videos. Or video, singular. Reminded me of when I was little. His very recent ones have acquired their own flair ("The Truth About Nit-Pickers" was pretty amazing even if I'm slightly undecided on the main point), but it isn't the same. I never adopted his philosophy or a libertarian one, but in my teens I got really, really into debate. And although the work gets harder, I still want to hone my thoughts on things through that. A part of that--indeed, a vital part--is hearing opposing views, and Stefan has opposed me economically and on immigration, so it's a natural fit. So that's me. How 'bout you guys?