Comment: Naturalism in the context of

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I don't get it. (see in situ)

Naturalism in the context of

Naturalism in the context of my post would be metaphysical naturalism, which would include that human beings are just products of the chemical, biological and cultural evolutionary process.

In such a worldview, all behaviors are selected for by their advantage to the reproductive success of those who adopt the behavior.

In such a view, to argue for libertarian values in an honest way you would have to admit that

1) they are in your own self interest
2) they fulfilled some subjective value you hold, such as liberty, over other values (equality, security)
3) they served some social goal you desired, such as the most prosperity for everyone overall, regardless of any single individual's self interest

You would have no basis for telling others they ought to accept your views and work to achieve them, unless

1) they also served their self interest
2) they also held the same subjective value or goal, liberty, over competing values, and regardless of self interest
3) they held the same social goal you hold, regardless of self interest

But you could not honestly claim there was something truly moral or immoral and binding on everyone else, simple as a given. But that is what most of the self avowed naturalist libertarians do. So my post is to tell them they cannot do so coherently.

Since most of the people I interact with, in the context of this post, hold both positions (naturalism, and the objectively binding nature of claims to rights and the rightness of anarchism or libertarian political goals), the 'hard truth' would be the two are not compatible.

A second hard truth would be the strategy is totally ineffective.

To be effective, you'd need to promote your goals the way the establishment does, which actually works: emotionally imposed pseudo-religious beliefs like political correctness, imposed by harsh social consequences to departing from orthodoxy,

Or, second, the political method: appeal to their immediate self interests.

Or, third, the classical route: these beliefs are objectively true because God, or the soul, makes every individual of objective worth and deserving of moral behavior, because it is 'Right.'

I am not aware of any other effective way to get people to adopt the desired behavior or political priority.