4 replies »

  1. Being a friend of Mr. Lewis, and upon hearing the totality of the discussion, I was frankly astonished at Dr. Block’s consequentialist approach to demonstrating the validity of the NAP. I was also baffled at how he considered the NAP to be the ONLY possible foundation for ethics, as well as his blatant virtue-signalling at the end of the discussion.

    Todd and I have been discussing this issue for the better part of six years, and I think both of us were expecting more from Block. Unfortunately, that was not the case.

    • I thought Todd definitely outperformed Walter in this. Todd has clearly given a great deal of thought to this question, knew what he wanted to say, was familiar with opposing points of view, and was obviously better prepared. Walter mostly just recited Anarcho-Capitalism 101. I’ve seen Walter participate in other debates and while he’s certainly an energetic speaker I’ve never been that impressed with his debating skills. I watched him debate the Hayek Triangle with Mark Skousen once and thought he under performed in that as well.

      • I’d like to hear your take on the NAP and Self-Ownership, Keith. Although I imagine that you are more of a Stirnerite, and ironically find its metaphysical basis as vacuous as I do.

        • Yes, I am a Stirnerite. Self-Ownership and the NAP might be useful as mere social conventions, Sorelian myths, or Platonic noble lies, but that’s all they are. Like any other set of ideas, they have their limitations.

Leave a Reply