-19 votes

POLL: Which Principle is More Important?

Which of these two principles is more important to you?

---> http://strawpoll.me/3200/

Make sure to comment with why you voted the way you did or any other observation so we can get as many people to take the poll as possible! Thanks!

OTHER POLLS:
http://strawpoll.me/3284/
http://strawpoll.me/3274/
http://strawpoll.me/3262/
http://strawpoll.me/3238/
http://strawpoll.me/3236/
http://strawpoll.me/3202/



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Per the example, you're

Per the example, you're creating more choices than you have, completely misconstruing the example to your liking, in an attempt to discredit the point made which is still made by pointing out the real-world choice you're making.

Let's say you can't stop the person all together, but you CAN lower the amount stolen.

You only have two choices. Stop them from stealing MORE, or stand there saying that you don't condone it?

Creating a 3rd choice isn't what you have in either case.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

Don't create bad examples then

You created an scenario which actually had more than 2 choices, if you want to exemplify something than make an appropriate example, not a bad one that requires someone to pretend the other options aren't there.

A better example was the one I already raised the choice between endorsing the lesser of three murderers or not endorsing any of them.

I choose to not endorse any of them, and to call them out as murderers, you say this puts blood on my hands.

That is ridiculous I have chosen not to enable them, and I have no responsibility for their actions.

However, if you were to endorse one of them, you would have blood on your hands, you would have enabled a murderer, you would be responsible for their actions because you assisted them.

I get it you have no problem with Gary Johnson's foreign policy, you don't care if he launches "humanitarian wars" or continues the drone strikes in Pakistan.

Some of us do have major problems with that, and we think the lives of people we may not even know, thousands of miles away, are more important, then what at best could be modest gains for the Libertarian party.

The LP could have easily picked a philosophically consistent candidate, but they chose to go the 2008 route again. It's their mistake and they are going to have to live with it.

I mean come on, they picked a guy who can't even honestly be characterized as a minarchist, which is the lowest bar in libertarianism.

Bottom line his pro-war, and pro-drug war policies(with the exception marijuana) would constitute enormous violations of the rights of millions of people, if he were to be elected.

This is not acceptable, and it is not libertarian, it is certainly immoral

Forgive me for not wanting to be party to that, you are still free to be.

side note: BTW, are you aware the LP requires you to pledge adherence to the NAP as prerequisite for membership? I wouldn't plan on joining it anytime soon if you have a problem with this principle, but then you could always just be disingenuous like the other consequentialists who join it without believing in it.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

You ignored the question when given a more detailed example...

Answer the question...

...if he had already stolen oranges (the violation of NAP is going to happen when you like it or not) and you had the choice to keep it from happening as much (by voting for Gary Johnson) or stand there letting more get stolen yelling at the top of your lungs (a write in for Paul or not voting = Obamney to violate NAP even more)... which would you do...

2 choices
Stop the orange stealing from being worse
OR
Stand there telling yourself you have no responsibility because you yelled that you don't like oranges being stolen

Which one?

This time without ignoring the GOOD version of the example.

And P.S. My original example only had two choices. YOU added a 3rd. "Ability to LOWER THE NUMBER of oranges stolen." & "Yelling at the top of your lungs that you don't like oranges stolen." Don't blame you misconstruing the example into a bad one on me.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

Fruit Salad

Why not bananas, or grapefruit, maybe even pineapple.

This is asinine.

You already know the answer, I've answered it several times, I'm not going to choose the lesser evil in any scenario.

I'm not going to vote for Gary Johnson in any scenario.

I'm not going to continue answering the same question over and over.

We've had this same conversation three times now.

You reaffirm your everlasting love for Gary Johnson, and I tell you I'm not going to endorse him and his Pro-war policies.

You then accuse me of being selfish, for not picking poor old Gary over the rights of people who would be harmed by his policies.

You have fun playing with your fruit.

Goodbye.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

You didn't answer the question...

You answered the question to an example I never gave as a way to avoid answering the question I actually asked.

"Answer the question...

...if he had already stolen oranges (the violation of NAP is going to happen when you like it or not) and you had the choice to keep it from happening as much (by voting for Gary Johnson) or stand there letting more get stolen yelling at the top of your lungs (a write in for Paul or not voting = Obamney to violate NAP even more)... which would you do...

2 choices
Stop the orange stealing from being worse
OR
Stand there telling yourself you have no responsibility because you yelled that you don't like oranges being stolen

Which one?"

This time, without squirming, excuses, cop outs, etc... thanks...

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

+ 16 trillion

.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

You mean like you did with changing Gary in my example from

a crap sprinkled banana split to a bologna sandwich.

Josh is absolutely right.. I see him as another evil and you see him as a step forward but admit he isn't the leap that we need.

Half-assed isn't good enough to us purist.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

I pointed out that the food

I pointed out that the food choice was different for different people because we have our different perceptions of him.

You gave a bad example seeing as the 3rd choice in reality is different for different people.

You're using circular reasoning...

Half-assed is not good enough to the point that you're willing to let whole-assed in without a real fight.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

No I gave an example based on what I thought of the three

choices.

So you're willing to let a part ass in over a whole ass.

Glad we're in agreement that Johnson is part ass. lol

I'm looking for something better.. I can wait.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Leave this guy to his food

Leave this guy to his food fetish.

He's not worth the opportunity cost.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Liberty can not exist

Liberty can not exist in a two party monopoly system.
IMO the most important thing we can do know is try and get Johnson in the debates.

Johnson needs to get a feasible plan together towards that end.

The second is not a principle

The second choice is not a principle it is choice.

If you know some one can not win it is not a violation of a principle not to vote for them.

By definition, a "principle"

By definition, a "principle" is a "rule of actions or conduct".

The "vote" is the action and the "who you want even if they can't win" is the criteria for the choice which defines the principle's "rule" itself.

I never said or implied it was a violation to not vote for them. That's why I included it in the definition of the principle.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

False Dichotomy

There is majority overlap between these two principles.

If there's evidence that

If there's evidence that voting for someone else promotes the liberty movement more than voting for who you want... there isn't.

For example... I can give a much longer list of ways support and a vote for Johnson promotes the liberty movement and our Paul inspired agenda than a write-in for Paul does.

Claiming "False dichotomy" is easy when you don't look at all of the facts regarding which choice promotes the liberty movement more.

If you didn't look at the pros and cons thoroughly... how can you choose in the first place?

If you never really weighed your choices properly, how can you claim a false dichotomy?

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

without Ron Paul there would be no liberty movement

Or not a significant one, with millions of members. Gary Johnson didn't get this ball rolling. How could he possibly advance the cause of liberty? He's riding Ron's coat tails. I would wager half or more of his votes will come from RP supporters, who feel they have nowhere else to turn.

We all know that and give great thanks to RP

You're talking about the work done in the past that has resulted in what we have today.

This question is regarding the promotion of the liberty movement from here on out to its full potential.

What are all of the things a write-in for Ron Paul does for the liberty movement?

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

It reminds me of the topic the Professor in

a college American History class gave us for an essay on the American Revolution: "Were Political Principles Or Property Rights A More Important Cause Of The Revolution?" For a libertarian, there is no conflict between property rights and political principles, but the Professor was trying to create an artificial distinction. Your poll does the same thing.

You're open-minded enough to

You're open-minded enough to realize that as much as you want to vote for Paul and do a write-in, voting for GJ promotes liberty the most. Because of this... they overlap as you said.

MANY users on this site aren't open-minded, but tell themselves they are. They end up sabotaging good things for the sake of a loyalty they have to a belief OVER integrity to it... when integrity IS loyalty.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

No,

Your wrong, I simply do not beleive Gary Johnson is a good thing.

When are you going to understand, Im open minded to people who are not ignorant when it comes to liberty.

List all of the good things

List all of the good things for the liberty movement that come from your write-in of Paul.

I bet I could list more good things for the liberty movement AND country that come from support and a vote for Johnson.

If it's so "simple"... this should be easy for you.

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

man, You simply do not get it

This Presidential Race, MEANS NOTHING, Supporting GJ will distract and split everything we have done.

I dont care for your lists, If you LOVE Gj so much, prove to ME why.

Explain to me HOW supporting KONY is a Good thing

Explain to me HOW Interfeering in another country has ANYTHING to do with what Ron Paul speaks about?

Explain to me the extent of which Gary Johnson understands the banking system.

I dont have to list ANYTHING for you, We are all individuals, Stop trying to FORCE your will onto others, really you have no idea.

This is MUCH MUCH MORE than this Presidential Race, this has been going for over 5 years now, And it aint going to stop just because you want it too.

How many times do I have to tell these people I DO NOT TRUST GARY JOHNSON! Its is GJ's Job to EARN that trust. Simple!

It's a simple

It's a simple question...

What good comes out of writing in Ron Paul for the sake of the liberty movement now and in the future?

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

My God

You seem to have a big problem comprehending what people say.

If I was too vote, it would mean I can sleep at night.

What im saying is that voting for GARY JOHNSON, would cause NO GOOD, only a false leader, and division and destruction.

I dont trust him, WHAT MORE DO YOU NEED TO KNOW!

Answer my questions regarding KONY and others.

THIS IS YOUR PROBLEM GARY JOHNSON SUPPORTERS, You try to trick people into beleiving you, instead of explaining exactly why we should, and truthfully refuting the objections people have.

I don't want to be biased...

I don't want to be biased... so I don't want to come up with the list myself... so I'm asking YOU to give me a list of the positive ways a write-in for Paul promotes the liberty movement.

I need you to do that in order for me to "explain exactly why you should".

I'll refute the objections after the point I first tried making that you're trying as hard as possible to avoid. I already have the responses to your objections ready to go, but this point needs to be made first and it's best to stick to one thing at a time.

So, what are the ways that a write-in for Ron Paul promotes the liberty movement?

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

What point

am I trying to avoid.

I do not have to explain myself to you, YOUR the one trying to do the convincing.

GO AWAY!

I wil NOT be voting this year, and If you can not work out why then, I will not be responding, as you are obviously ignorant, and have not been here long at all, because you have no idea who I am.

Who do you think you are, coming in here thinking you own the place.

Once again - I do not have to explain ANYTHING to you, Your the one trying to do the convincing here.

By the way, this entire post is stupid, Principles are Principles, one doesnt over ride the other.

It's no one's job to do

It's no one's job to do anything. You were a part of this conversation by choice. If you wanted to have a rational discussion you and I would both be open to the other making points to each other. IF that were the case, you would have simply answered the simple question so I could make my point, but instead you kept giving excuses "it's not my job".

I just wanted to finish making a point before going onto yours. My point was actually going to invalidate a bunch of yours, but you wouldn't let me make it.

That sort of contradicts you claiming that it was my job to "explain why you should". How can I explain something to someone who intentionally doesn't let me explain something?

I'm going to use that next time I get into a debate.
"It's your job to prove you're right and I'm wrong, but you're not allowed to make your point."

GENIUS! I'll win every time! :D

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

Haha um Why

are you not allowed to make your point again?

Go ahead, no one is stopping you.

Ive already told you, I see no point in voting for GJ.

Have fun on your merry go round.

I need someone that is FOR

I need someone that is FOR writing-in Paul to come up with a list of how the vote promotes the liberty movement... because a list by me could possibly include less since I have bias against it and naturally wouldn't want to see all the good things there are.

If I said "writing in paul wouldn't promote the liberty movement at all" and it weren't true... you'd come back with a list to prove me wrong anyway... so why should I make a biased assumption at any level?

So to make this a fair point... just answer the simple question...

How does a write-in vote for Ron Paul promote the liberty movement towards its full potential now in 2012 and in the future?

Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally

This reminds me of the argument clinic

skit by Monty Python.