Argumenter mot ikke-tvang

Diskusjon om generelle politiske temaer, som ikke passer inn under innenriks/utenriks.

Argumenter mot ikke-tvang

Innlegg Frode 28 Mai 2014, 13:26

Er det noen som har referanser på gode bøker, artikler etc som forsøker å argumentere mot ikke-tvang som prinsipp? Takk på forhånd....
Innlegg: 28
Registrert: 07 Apr 2012, 12:04

Re: Argumenter mot ikke-tvang

Innlegg Vegard Martinsen 29 Mai 2014, 06:23

Din tenkeevne er noen du har for å veilede dine handlinger.

Tvang er å nekte deg å gjøre det du vil, og å baske deg opp eller å sette deg i fengsel hvis du ikke lystrer.

Dette er ikke noe anet enn å fornekte din tenkeevne, dvs det er p fornekte det ved deg som gjlr deg til et menneske.

I alt hun har skrevet går Ayn Rand dypt inn på dette.

Et eks:

To interpose the threat of physical destruction between a man and his perception of reality, is to negate and paralyze his means of survival; to force him to act against his own judgment, is like forcing him to act against his own sight. Whoever, to whatever purpose or extent, initiates the use of force, is a killer acting on the premise of death in a manner wider than murder: the premise of destroying man’s capacity to live.

Do not open your mouth to tell me that your mind has convinced you of your right to force my mind. Force and mind are opposites; morality ends where a gun begins. When you declare that men are irrational animals and propose to treat them as such, you define thereby your own character and can no longer claim the sanction of reason—as no advocate of contradictions can claim it. There can be no “right” to destroy the source of rights, the only means of judging right and wrong: the mind.

To force a man to drop his own mind and to accept your will as a substitute, with a gun in place of a syllogism, with terror in place of proof, and death as the final argument—is to attempt to exist in defiance of reality. Reality demands of man that he act for his own rational interest; your gun demands of him that he act against it. Reality threatens man with death if he does not act on his rational judgment; you threaten him with death if he does. You place him in a world where the price of his life is the surrender of all the virtues required by life—and death by a process of gradual destruction is all that you and your system will achieve, when death is made to be the ruling power, the winning argument in a society of men.

Be it a highwayman who confronts a traveler with the ultimatum: “Your money or your life,” or a politician who confronts a country with the ultimatum: “Your children’s education or your life,” the meaning of that ultimatum is: “Your mind or your life”—and neither is possible to man without the other.
Vegard Martinsen
Innlegg: 7866
Registrert: 07 Sep 2003, 12:07

Gå til Generell politikk

Hvem er i forumet

Brukere som leser i dette forumet: Ingen registrerte brukere og 2 gjester