Persuasive Essay On Libertarianism

Persuasive Essay On Libertarianism
Ah, Freedom. That ideal for which so many have fought and died. That treasure so precious as to be worth fighting and dying for. That beauty
matched only by Lady Liberty herself. For all the divides in red–and–blue America, have we forgotten that blood that unites us all?
The mega rich certainly think so. With all the noise about having a roof over one's head and living paycheck to paycheck, is it only they who see the
unadulterated beauty of this great nation? Is it only they who push back against Bernie Sanders, college students, and the middle class, those present
iterations of the invading British army? Is it only they who even sense this latest challenge to freedom? Billionaires, duty–bound, from the Koch
brothers to Rupert Murdoch, are loading their muskets. It does seem, regrettably, they are our last stand.
It is no accident that people with the biggest wallets are the first to espouse liberty. Libertarianism, broadly the philosophy of liberty (especially
economic), comes in different strands, but a common, if unfortunate, interpretation is ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The tragedy of libertarianism is that the brand has been adopted by those who invoke liberty to pass their greed as a civic virtue. But they are right
for the wrong reasons, for greed is good only insofar as it salvages our lowest instincts; only in the right economy can greed be put to public use. These
men, their poor character, and their lousy salesmanship pollute libertarianism's reputation and strip it of nuance. Being a libertarian, indeed, means
more than gutting welfare and cutting taxes for the rich. Being a libertarian means more than making money and harboring contempt for the poor.
Being a libertarian means discovering the delicious, sweet blend of social liberalism and economic conservatism, the former embraced by the
empathetic American liberal and the latter decorated by Nobel Prize winners whose applications can be defended by the
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Is There A Plausible Form Of Libertarianism?
Is there a plausible form of Libertarianism?
Libertarianism, in its most general sense, is a political philosophy in which the upholding of individual liberty is the principle objective. More than
that, however, Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice; believing that each individual has the right to make their own choices
about how to live their lives – as long as they respect the rights of others to do the same.
This paper will deviate from this general perception; instead discussing Libertarianism in a narrower sense with a focus on the view of full
self–ownership and moral acquisition of property rights. This specific approach is based largely on the work of John Locke and further elaborated by
Robert Nozick, regarded as articulating a more 'right–wing' interpretation of the libertarian doctrine. This essay will address the central questions that
Libertarianism aims to answer and critique the various views surrounding those responses laying the foundation for the essay's conclusion that
right–wing Libertarianism is in fact an impractical and deficient political theory.
In a nutshell, the questions at the core of Libertarianism are why and what. The 'why' surrounds why any government is desirable or necessary in the
first place. The 'what' is concerned with the type of government that is to be chosen, given one is desirable at all. In answering these two questions,
Libertarianism's primary concern surrounds ownership and the minimal state.

Essay On Libertarianism
The United States of America is known to be the land of the free. However, freedom to me refers ones ability to act, speak, and think as long as it
doesn't interfere with the rights of others, which America doesn't abide by. The US government is considered a Constitutional Republic in which
officials that are elected to represent the people must govern in concern to the constitutional law, where its people have split into four different civic
stances that correlate to the individuals beliefs in regards to political stance and social issues. The two main civic stances that have divided the country
are conservatives and liberals or more commonly known as Republicans and Democrats. Conservatives believe that the role of government should be
limited to provide freedom for... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The US government is in control of what one can and cant do in regards to social issues of abortion, gay marriage, and drugs. This control restricts
ones individual rights as human beings to have the freedom of freewill. According to David Boaz, "libertarianism is the view that each person has
the right to live his life in any way he choose so long as he respects the equal right of others" (The Coming Libertarian Age, pg.280). Should
something you do in the privacy of your own home affect others? Everyone has they ability to decide for him or herself what is right or wrong.
Abortion has always been a large debate in the US since Roe v. Wade. I believe that abortion is a personal choice that women make privately. No one
should have a right to say what she has to do in that certain situation. Of course abortion pass her first trimester is considered murder and at that point
of the pregnancy no women should abort. Abortion is an issue that should be dealt with privately. The government shouldn't have to get involved in an
issue that doesn't affect the general public, which also applies to the other social issues of gay marriage and drug

Utilitarianism Vs Libertarianism : Utilitarianism And...
In one of the courses I am currently enrolled, "Social Justice" our class spend copious amount of days talking about Utilitarianism and Libertarianism.
These are two important theory's that have been discussed for a very long time. These are two philosophies that elaborates how the citizen pleases to
live by. Utilitarianism and Libertarianism may have similar things in common but at the same time they are very distinguishable. The Utilitarianism
theory tries to maximize the happiness of the community and minimize the pain over all. On the other hand, Libertarianism focus on individual rights.
They strive for freedom. As many may know that Utilitarianism and Libertarianism are two well–known theories wither it have been discussed in your
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Being that Utilitarianism supports a free market economy, then owners of stores or when worldwide business are able to alter the price of whatever
they please. In another word, it's just like a monopoly to a certain extend. A monopoly is when there is no competing when it comes to markets. For
example, if Apple I–phones was the only types of phone in the United Stated then the people would not have an option but to purchase that phone. This
intertwines with Utilitarianism because any business can raise the prices of the items in their store. The example that Sandel used in his novel, "Stores
that normally sold small household generators for $250 were now asking $2,000" (Sandel 2009). Just because there is a storm and hurricane the
companies that are in charge of generators, hotels or roof repairs can charge whatever they please. The second philosophy that will be mention is,
Libertarianism. This theory focuses on individual rights, common currency of value, free market and most important collective happiness.
Libertarianism believe that there is no such thing as redistribution of wealth. It is not morally right to resell or taunt with incomes, land reform or
taxation. They also believe that the government knows what right for the people. In the novel Sandel mentioned, "Taxing the rich to help the poor is
not morally correct, it violates their right to do what they want with the things they own" (Sandel 2009). Many rich individuals may

Philosophy comparing libertarianism, compatibilism, and...
Comparing Determinism, Compatibilism, and Libertarianism Patrick C Smith Ivy Tech Community College The question that the textbook poses
at the very beginning of chapter four is, "Are you Free" (Chaffee, 2013, p. 172)? Most people would look at this question as pretty cut and dry and
would answer a resounding yes. Philosophically speaking, it is not that easy of an answer. You have to be willing to look at the question with an
open mind, and ask yourself if the choices you make are truly free or if they are governed by forces outside of your control. In the following paper I
intend to compare and contrast the three major philosophical viewpoints regarding this question, and come to a... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
Determinists believe that these ideas are based on the illusion of freedom (Chaffee, 2013, p. 178). I thought that Baron d'Holbach summarized the
determinists viewpoint when he said, "Man's life is a line that nature commands him to describe upon the surface of the earth, without ever being
able to swerve from it, even for an instant. He is born without his own consent; his organization does in nowise depend upon himself; his ideas
come to him involuntarily; his habits are in the power of who cause him to contract them; he is unceasingly modified by causes, whether visible or
concealed, over which he has no control, which necessarily regulate his mode of existence, give the hue to his way of thinking, and determine his
manner of acting" (Chaffee, 2013, p. 178). One of the strengths of the determinist viewpoint is that it is hard to argue against. There are definite
patterns and connections throughout the physical universe and the biological realm. There is no denying that fact. Just look at modern chemistry or
how everything is made up of waves. Also, you can't prove that you ever had more than one choice since there can only ever be one choice. In other
words, once the moment is gone it is impossible to say that things could have been different since there is no going back. It is also hard to deny that
some of our actions are a result of certain causes. You can always argue that something in your past affected your choices in the present.

The Rise Of Libertarianism
On September 17, 1787 the founding fathers signed the United States constitution in Philadelphia. Two years later George Washington was
unanimously elected to be the first president by the electoral college. The world was shocked by America's ability to defeat one of the most powerful
militaries in the world and set up a revolutionary new type of government known as a democratic republic where each state shared power with the
federal government. Many rulers believed the United States would fail as a nation, and as America continued to prosper rulers began to fear that it
would be a matter of time before democracy spread to their countries. Democracy eventually spread to the rest of the western world, kings and queens
were replaced by elected ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Treasury. This is why they U.S national debt is 19.9 trillion dollars and growing at a starting rate. As Thomas Jefferson once said "To preserve their
independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and
servitude. If we run into such debts, as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our
amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty–four,
give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses; and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we
must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes; have no time to think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account; but be glad to obtain
subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow–sufferers." The truth is Americans taxes are going toward the interests
of the wealthy not the average American, this among many other reasons is why America is an Oligarchy. According to a study done by Northwestern
and Princeton University in 2014, America is an Oligarchy not

Argumentative Essay On Libertarianism
When the 2016 presidential election comes to a vote, I am going to cast my ballot in the name of the libertarian leaning candidate Rand Paul. I
chose this candidate because of my personal views and beliefs. I do not consider myself a Republican or Democrat, but rather a Libertarian. The
reason I am a member of the Libertarian party is because Libertarians support maximum liberty when it comes to personal and economic matters.
Libertarians advocate for small government, one that is limited to protecting individuals from violence and coercion, and one that opposes bureaucracy
and taxes. The focal point of the party are the values of individual liberty and autonomy. These are values our government should model their political
agenda around, because I believe that I should be able to make responsible decisions without the interference of any outside force stemming from the
government or another individual. Rand Paul promotes a very important value regarding individual rights. The value of individual autonomy.
Individual autonomy is the ability to make decisions regarding every aspect of your life. As a responsible individual, you should have the... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
An article published by the New York Times details Obama's bailout. According to the article, the bailout was mainly focused towards the auto
companies General Motors, and Chrysler. Evidently, this costly bailout was in vain. For example, cars such as the Focus and C–Max Hybrid were
being sold at such a low rate that factories producing these vehicles were shut down for over three weeks. Also, due to low gas prices, automobile
companies will have a harder time selling fuel efficient cars. This bailout is a great example of why the market should be allowed to regulate itself
based on consumer demand. Libertarian economic policies are constructed with this value in

Libertarianism Vs Libertarianism
Based on the political quiz that evaluated my stances on certain issues, my political beliefs and interests aligned with Centrist ideology, although
slightly leaning to the Left Wing. Despite my upbringing as a strong Republican, the results classifying me as a Centrist did not shock me due the
simple fact of maturation and growing more aware of current world and local issues through watching the morning news, reading news articles on the
internet or reading The New York Times, and going to high school. Overtime, with these various exposures– a wide variety of political beliefs– I
stopped relying on what I just knew from being around my family and hearing only their bias opinions, and instead began analyzing at what I
personally believe and... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
should preserve the electoral college and its process of selecting the President, Republicans likewise believe that the electoral college be kept for the
fact that it defends against the threat of corruption in the voting process as it guarantees each individual state, regardless of its population size, the
ability to influence the election – contrary to basing presidential election on just popular vote ("A Rebirth of Constitutional Government" par. 11). I
matched closest to the Libertarian party in immigration and social issues, as I believe that citizens of America each have the right to pursue happiness
in their own respected way, Libertarians similarly believe that citizens not only have the right to live their sexual orientation, thus supporting
homosexual marriage, but also the right of women to receive abortions ("Securing Liberty" par. 3.2). Furthermore, as I support the preservation and
growth of the military as well as the peaceful growth of the U.S. globally, Libertarians also support not only the continuation of the U.S.'s armed forces
to protect the U.S. from outside violent forces ("Securing Liberty par. 3.4). The main issues that I had thought about were about healthcare, gun control,
immigration, science, and the environment, mainly because these issues emotionally applied to my current life, as both my parents came to America as
immigrants, often gun violence targets minorities without knowledge of the actual circumstance– violence moving beyond African Americans and
now targeting even those resembling ethnicities of the Middle East, the fact that I was raised to appreciate and care for the climate– conscious of the
effects of nuclear waste on wildlife and the environment, and also because I strived to pursue a career in the medical field, wanting to know the effect
various healthcare systems had on my potential career. However, I didn't

A Summary Of Libertarianism
Josie, the mother in the story, chose to leave her family to go abroad in order for her to provide their needs and give them a better life, but as a result,
her husband died and didn't even see him for the last time, her children don't know her anymore, specifically her eldest daughter who rebelled against
her. Josie's family got broken and hate spread through them.
Carla is accountable for the shuttering of their family, intentionality is the condition that is applicable, because Carla had her own reasons why she is
like that, fighting her mother, always want to get her wants, disrespectful and others. Her anger to her mother pushed her to rebelled against her.
Carla herself is accountable for what happened to her, she viewed freedom by doing all what she wants, deciding all by herself and not listening to
anyone. Libertarianism is the view of freedom that is appropriate for this, cause there are no exact laws but there are choices to chose from. ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
She is not excuse to disrespect her mother, yes, maybe josie is not there as she grows up, didn't see her everyday and she's not the one that makes
daday stops as she cries but she is still her mother, daday came from her and josie should get all the respect that a mother

Examples Of Libertarianism
A free action is something that you do willingly and by your own choice. An action is unfree or compelled when it is out of your control and when
you are forced to do something or it is chosen for you without your input. An example of a free action is talking. When you talk you are choosing
what to say with no outside forces compelling you to do anything, for instance no one is telling you what to say. Another example of a free action is
choosing who your friends are. Ultimately you choose who you would like to spend your time with in order to enjoy yourself and no one can control
your friendship with others. The third example of a free action is choosing what you eat. By being particular about what you eat you are choosing what
you are eating... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Not just in action but in will. At least some of our actions are caused by us and not by antecedent causes outside our control. Frankfurt's argument for
libertarianism is the most effective. He argues that free will is definitive of our conception of what it is to be a person. We have first order desires
which is "S wants X", for example "Claire wants to dance." We also have second order desires which is "S want to want to X", such as "Claire
wants to want to eat healthy." He also argues that both animals and us have 1st order desires but second order desires are specific to us. Frankfurt
says that first order desires can conflict among themselves and uncountably many of them are not at all effective, which means that they don't
always lead or motivate action. The relationship between the two desires are "S wants to X, but doesn't want to X." He also says there is a second
order volition which is "S wants to want to X, and wants to X", for example " I want to want to eat healthy, and want to eat healthy." This shows that
you endorse your desire. He argues that free will means that your second order volition and your first order agree and that if you lack second order
volition it means you don't care what you want which means you aren't a

Essay on Libertarianism
For centuries philosophers have debated over the presence of free will. As a result of these often–heated arguments, many factions have evolved, the
two most prominent being the schools of Libertarianism and of Determinism. Within these two schools of thought lies another debate, that of
compatibilism, or whether or not the two believes can co–exist. In his essay, Has the Self "Free Will"?, C.A.Campbell, a staunch non–compatiblist and
libertarian, attempts to explain the Libertarian argument.
To achieve this, Campbell first sets out the two pre–suppositions necessary to the Libertarian argument. Firstly, he defines which kind of freedom he is
discussing when he speaks of free will. Campbell characterizes ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This is all that is needed to maintain the agent's moral responsibility. With these definitions in place, Campbell has finally set the stage for his argument.
To begin his argument, Campbell attempts to provide sufficient evidence for Libertarianism. He contends that, from phenomenological analysis, the
self is inescapably convinced that it possesses a freedom in the decision to exert or withhold the moral effort needed to rise to duty (389). In
laymen's terms, when one must make a moral choice, one can hear both the call to duty and the desire to do the opposite. This conflict and the
opportunity to choose offer proof, as far as Campbell is concerned, of moral freedom. While this may not be concrete proof, he claims that no one in
the position of making a moral choice can deny that they are the sole author of that decision, nor can they deny that they could have chosen otherwise.
It is through this experience of making moral choices that one can ascertain one's moral freedom.
Campbell's next step is disproving the leading arguments and criticisms against Libertarianism, in order to secure its place as the leading philosophical
view. If there are no sound arguments against Libertarianism, it must, therefore, be the pre–dominant theory. In order to achieve this Campbell attacks
what he believes to be the two strongest criticisms: that of predictability and that of meaninglessness. The

Three Main Principles Of Libertarianism
"As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his
or her values for the benefit of others." Quoted by https://www.lp.org/platform/. Libertarians believe that all individuals have the right to exercise sole
dominion over their own lives. The Libertarian party has three main principles. The first principle is the right to life, which means that Libertarians
support the prohibition of instigating physical force against others unless the provocation is applicable. The second principle is the right to liberty of
speech and action everyone has a right to speak their mind, and everyone has the right to protest within reason. The third and last main principle in the
Libertarian party as stated on their home page is the right to property which means that Libertarians oppose all government interference with private
property and they are against robbery, trespassing and misrepresentation. What this party represents the most is the full freedom for anyone to do what
they want, though they have the right to do what ever it is they want they will pay for the consequences and repercussions. When the Libertarian party
says individuals have the right to do whatever it is that they want to do, it does not mean anarchy. Every issues in the Libertarian party is within
reason. Libertarians believe that Citizens have the right to marry any gender or sex they please, to do anything to their

Compare And Contrast Determinism And Libertarianism
Determinism and Libertarianism
For many years, people have discussed how we choose what to do and what is the reason for choosing what to do. According to determinism, our
actions are out of control. Determinism claims that whatever we do is determined by previous events; therefore, we should not be countable for
whatever we do. Libertarianism, on the other hand, rejects the determinism and claims that everything we do is voluntary and we are free to make
decisions. Unlike a determinist, a libertarian would argue that whatever we do could be different if we desired to choose differently and if it were
physically possible to choose differently. Both determinists and libertarians try to prove each other wrong in many situations, but both generalize the
problem in a way that neither one can be right. Because neither determinism nor libertarianism has a good ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
There are things that we do and we know that they are bad for us, but we keep doing them because they are out of our control. Similarly, there are
some good things, like exercising, eating healthy foods, learning some good–but–complicated things, and so on, that we do not do and we do not like
to do because some forces keep us from doing them. If you think that you can choose to do something freely the way you want a, think again and
deeper, because something else caused you to decide doing that specific thing instead of doing something else instead. Or perhaps you did not have
other choices. These and many more are all examples of determinism. Determinism's argument is that whatever we do is a result of a previous event
and we cannot choose what to do because it is already chosen for us. Even though we may think that we chose to do something, it is not up to us
because it is up to whatever caused us to do

Bekke Libertarianism
Allen Bekke was a young white man who wanted to attend a medical school. He applied to the University of California, which did not accept him
since they reserved places to minorities: they had an affirmative action policy. Bekke sued the university, claiming he was deprived from his
constitutional right. Steping away from the details of Bekke case, the question needed to be asked is whether affirmative action is just? And on what
grounds can it be justified or rejected? I will argue that the libertarianism philosophy will reject the idea of a state affirmative action because it violate
individuals' freedom. Further I will consider some of the arguments made for and against affirmative action (Dworkin, 1977, p.11).
The libertarianism approach to justice lays on the grounds of the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
There are three main concept in the theory of entitlement. The first is the principle of acquisition which state that people are entitled to holdings they
acquired rightfully. John Locke (1632 – 1704) is the philosopher Nozick bases the idea how originally humans reached the situation of private
property. Which is, humans are allowed to use nature and mix their labor with it as long as they leave enough and as good to others (Nozick, 1974,
p.174–177). After we established the first principle we reach the second one, the principle of transfer. That is, humans are entitled to holdings they gain
through a transfer, under the condition that both parties were rightfully entitled to the holdings of the deal. The third principle, somewhat derived from
the previous two, stated that no one is entitled to holdings he acquired not in accordance with the first and second principles. In these cases where
historically people own holdings that they are not rightfully entitled to a rectification need to be considered (Nozick, 1974,

The Principle Of Libertarianism And The Government
One of the most popular controversys that even the Founding Fathers of America have been debating about since 1776 is the most just way of running
the U.S Government. Even today, it has not been thoroughly established which principal regarding Utility, freedom, or equality is the most significant
aspect of the U.S government. However, freedom has always been the most popular right that every American constantly struggle to fight for. The
Principle of Libertarianism is the individual right that everyone is entitled to and shall not be interfered by governments policy or regulations, as long as
these individual rights would not harm others as well. Considering the principle of Libertarianism, it does cater to the American People by not only
allowing individual rights that may protect the people from government corruption but also help benefit the economy of America in which demands
from the people are met and that brings the greatest happiness for everyone. Although, Libertarianism can not perfectly serve every aspect of a just
government, it should still be the most prioritized principal of the U.S government because overall it benefit the most civilians compare to the other
two principals. Economic disparities between the different social classes in America, has always caused huge dilemmas for the U.S government to
decided upon and not give every single individuals disregarding social status to have the rights to choose their own faith in terms of wealth. For
instance,

Libertarianism In America
The traditional, successful political parties in the United States are the Republicans, and the Democrats. However, as times arguably get worse, many
are starting to look for a new alternative. Many find that candidates from these two parties are no longer suiting the needs of the American people.
However, what if a new option existed, that did support the American people? A new option that minimized government, and increased individual
liberties. Well, than one would be speaking about the Libertarian Party. Founded in 1971; the Libertarian Party believes in a strong promotion for the
rights of the individual, and for having a strict control on the authority of government. Other aspects of a Libertarian government would include free
markets,... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It does not view its citizens as dollars, or just another number– but rather as a human being of importance. Libertarianism promotes the ideas that any
person in said country has the right to operate their life the way the choose; without unjustified involvement or interference by forces such as
government. If applied to the United States of America, I believe that we would prosper in ways never seen before. The very men that created this
government intended for its citizens to have the most freedom possible, and through time we have allowed these dreams to be tarnished. Former
President and Founding Father Thomas Jefferson has stated,"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." Due to our
current state of affairs, perhaps it is time that we explore the sea of liberty and create long lasting change within this

Compatibilism Vs Libertarianism
When I wake up in the morning, I have a set list of obligations for that day. Reasoning and habit dictate that I will follow through that set list, yet I
am my own being and have control over my actions. I have free will and can choose to sleep in bed all day or get up and do my chores. While there
are some situations where the consequences are out of our control, we still have the ability to decide when opportunities arise. Either extreme of this
argument has its fatal flaws, as the determinist see everything as the product of a choice made long ago, and the libertarianist claims we have free will
no matter how dire the situation is. Compatibilism makes the most sense to me, it is the difference between the two in an argument without a solution.
If we didn't, then we couldn't be held accountable for our actions. We couldn't be praised when doing good, nor shunned for doing bad. If we didn't
have freewill, laws would be pointless; we would be blaming someone for actions they had no control over. A determinist views everything based
around natural law, from our behaviors even to the way we think; everything is already predetermined. I fail to believe in that entirely and neither
could A.J. Ayer. He adapted his view based on behaviors of one's character. In the book "The Philosophical Imagination: An Introduction to
Philosophy", Ayer redefines what freedom is as to be able to break down the argument. "Suppose that I am compelled by another person to do
something 'against my will'. In that case, as the word 'freedom' is ordinarily used, I should not be said to be acting freely: and the fact that I am'
fully aware of the constraint to which I am subjected makes no difference to the matter." (Ayer, 114) He goes on to argue that the opposite of
freedom is constraint. When we say or think: "the event was out of that person's control" we are generally correct, the person had no say in the
matter. We fail to see that the person is under constraint, not force, as their actions are not determined by their rational conscience. They may desire to
make a different choice, but in the end are forced to make another. Ayer's point in all this is to show both sides of harddeterminism and libertarianism;
while there maybe times where things are out of our control, we still have an opinion on the matter, and we still have a say in as to the majority of
our other decisions. In redefining free, Ayer is able to conclude that compatibilism works because an action being caused, doesn't mean it is
constrained as one would believe it to be. He believed we need determinism to retain morality, as we determine who we are and the life we want to
live. In such instance, we have a choice that leads to a series of

Doctrine Of Libertarianism
This essay is a critical examination of the notion of free will, specifically with respect to the doctrine of libertarianism. In it, I discuss the weaknesses
associated with the libertarian position. I argue that libertarianism is unsubstantiated both empirically and conceptually. To be clear, this essay is not
meant to ultimately disprove Libertarianism, (I do not believe such can be accomplished due to the nature of the proposition); rather, I simply mean to
show why it is unreasonable to accept libertarianism with the evidence and argumentation currently available.
Three schools of thought dominate the conversation on free will: Determinism, Libertarianism, and Compatibilism. Determinism is the doctrine that
every event is casually determined ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Randomness does not result in free will. And a universe with undetermined agents seems to be unable to arise from a previously determined state.
Furthermore, the empirical evidence seems to be opposite to the doctrine of libertarianism, or at minimum, offer no support to it. While my essay may
not conclusively disprove libertarianism, that should provide no relief for libertarians. Bertrand Russell's Teapot should serve as a helpful reminder as
to why the burden of proof is on libertarianism. The analogy, used to illustrate that the burden of proof lies on the one making scientifically unfalsiable
claims, states that if Russell claims that a teapot– too small to be detected– orbits the sun somewhere between Earth and Mars, he should not expect
others to believe him merely because they cannot prove him wrong. The same holds true for libertarianism. Rather, Occam's razor would have us reject
libertarianism. As such, we should scratch agents and undetermined events from our

Determinism Vs Libertarianism
The controversial metaphysical debate of free will in philosophy revolves around the blatant discordancy between casual determinism and society's
perception of free will. In Philosophy by Manuel Velasquez, he describes this debate as "a controversy that still rages in our society" (p. 202). The
three foremost theories that are used in this deliberation are hard determinism, libertarianism, and compatibilism. Philosophers defend and believe in
each one of these theories based upon their individual characteristics. The claim that a set of laws govern the universe and that all events have a
purpose is known as the casual determinism theory (p. 204). Casual determinism presents the idea that it is plausible that all future events are
predictable and "that there is only one path leading from the past" to the future (p. 204). The belief in this theory conceives the possibility that
everything can be explained with reasoning based upon the laws of the universe. This concept would ease an individual's concern of the future with a
sense of security by knowing that the uncertainties of life's events are foreseeable. An example would be knowing that an individual's car will break
down on the highway during morning traffic or when a tree is going to fall on the roof of the house during a thunderstorm. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
204). It argues that casual determinism and free will cannot coexist, and that casual determinism is the only viable explanation for human actions (p.
204). This theory would eliminate the various stressors of life today because responsibility for one's actions would no longer be needed. An individual
could commit a crime and then claim that they did not have a choice because it was predetermined. If this were true then punishment should not exist
and "the saint should be no more praised than the criminal should be [imprisoned]"

Support and Contradictions of Hard Determinism and...
Freedom is the ability to do what a person desires and is capable of. For centuries philosophers have questioned if humans really have free will or not.
There are two bodies of thought on the subject. Determinists insist that choices are irrelevant to reality because there is a fated design for everyone.
Libertarianists allege that humans make choices and guide themselves through a decision making process and are in absolute control of their futures.
The thesis of determinism seems to contradict ordinary experiences, whereas the theory of libertarianism disregards event–causation. Philosopher Walter
T. Stace proposed an alternative compatibilist philosophy. In order to recognize the ways in which Stace effectively amalgamates the two thesis'
utilizing his campatibilist approach, an objective examination of the three ideas is compulsory. The following article will define the support and
contradictions of hard determinism and libertarianism, as well as clarify the ways in which compatibilism is a practical alternative.
Hard determinists believe that genetics determine personalities and actions only through the Newtonian laws of cause and effect. They affirm that
freedom and free will are fiction and because of this humans have no moral responsibility for their actions. They insist that the sources of motivation
behind their thoughts and actions are causualistic and predictable and that free will is an illusion triggered by convenience and ego. The past
determines the future.

Essay On Libertarianism
The Affordable Care Act is the healthcare law signed by President Obama that expands insurance coverage . One of the disputed components is the
individual mandate, which requires individuals have health insurance or pay a penalty1. Requiring individuals to buy health insurance regardless of
their preference has raised much opposition. One of the arguments is based on the political theory of libertarianism. Libertarianism asserts that the
legitimate role of the government should be limited to protecting the rights of citizens . Libertarians think it is the right of the individual to decide
whether or not they want to buy health insurance. They argue this mandate violates their rights, and is therefore unethical. This essay will argue the
individual ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
His reasoning of this concept is that, "In a free society, diverse persons control different resources, and new holdings arise out of the voluntary
exchanges and actions of persons5." His quote refers to the principle of transfer, with voluntary transactions being the best way of allocating and
distributing resources2. In a voluntary transaction, the buyer and seller engage in a win–win scenario where both parties have a satisfactory trade on
their own terms. Nozick discusses his objection to redistribution policies because of the patterned principle and forcing people to work for others4.
He argues the patterned principle justifies distribution on some basis such as needs or effort4. This is problematic, because it plays back into his
concerns of a certain group having control of resources. Forcing people to work for others is also problematic to him because it goes against voluntary
transaction. For the individual mandate, Nozick sees these problems as central to this component of the healthcare law. Having presented a case for
why libertarians find the individual mandate unjust, the following paragraphs will provide a counterargument that examines flaws in the libertarian

What Is Libertarianism?
think that Libertarianism is the best account for free will. The text did a good job explaining this point by saying people have control over what
they do and in accordance to free will, humans are able to make choices. In regards to our involvement with the law of nature, we are able to make
decisions that are able to be seen in the future with foreknowledge, meaning we can make decisions without the future being present. This shows that
we are somewhat separate from this law, however it still has dominion over us in a physical sense. We are consciously able to think in accordance to
our conceived thoughts and act out on them. An example is getting a new job while still being employed at another job. One is able to create plans,
budgeting,

Arguments Against Libertarianism
Libertarianism is the social–political philosophy that emphasizes autonomy, freedom of choice, and individual rights above all else. Its name comes
from Liberty – as in a liberty to act as a morally autonomous agent without public or private interference. Although Libertarianism holds a generally
skeptical view of political government, it does not entirely argue for anarchism. Libertarianism does argue for a limited government, not necessarily
limited in its actual physical size or scope, but rather limited in its ability, and power, to interfere into the aforementioned autonomy of a moral citizen.
There are many schools of thoughts within Libertarianism. The purpose of this paper is not to give a defense of a specific Libertarian philosophy, ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
As was argued before, it is wrong for a state to impose moral values (even if those values are right). Even more so, to do so creates inequality. Take
the contemporary policy debate of whether an income bracket should be taxed lower or higher. Conservatives may argue for a lower tax on
certain, and liberals may argue for higher tax on the rich. Both are wrong and unfair, and will only create inequality. It is wrong, and immoral, to
target a single group based on materialistic attributes such as income. One cannot be selected for more harsher or lenient treatment based on how
much money one makes. It should be equal for everyone as it is the only fair position of not having a law benefit one group because of X or Y trait
or characteristic. I disagree with Rawl's progressive taxation arguments. If a person, born equally into a society with equal opportunity, happens to
make more money than the rest, he or she should not be taxed any differently. For doing so would allow the state to impose a restriction on an
autonomous citizen that had not fault in virtue of making more or less money. Equal representation under the law, and tax code, should be what is
fair. Inequalities are bound to arise, and Rawl's concern of them is a fair one, but to impose a penalty on a demographic because of X characteristic is
unfair. The law should be equal to all. Libertarianism advocates for equality, as

Libertarianism
Libertarianism is the belief in liberty. They are also known as "The Party of Principle" because they firmly believe in their principles. Libertarians
believe that each person owns his own life and property and has the right to make his own choices as to how he lives his life and uses his property –
as long as he simply respects the equal right of others to do the same. In the libertarian view, all human relationships should voluntary; the only actions
that should be forbidden by law are those that involve the initiation of force against those who have themselves used force – actions like murder, rape,
robbery, kidnapping, and fraud. In popular terminology, a libertarian is the opposite of an authoritarian. Strictly speaking, a libertarian is one who
rejects the idea of using violence or the threat of violence – legal or illegal – to impose his will or viewpoint upon any peaceful person. Generally
speaking, a libertarian is one who wants to be governed far less than he is today. Although the libertarian party is a minor party, there is a lot to know
about it. The Libertarian party began on December 11, 1971, in Westminster, Colorado. Even though in 1971, it achieved its height of success in... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
One of those figures is Gary Johnson. Gary was born January 1, 1953, in Minot, North Dakota. He is an American business executive and politician
who ran for president in 2012 and also 2016. He actually began his career as a conservative republican, but after acknologing that he had a liberal
stance on numerous issues (the legalization of marijuana and immigration reform), he switched over to the Liberal Party. While running for president,
he advocated for tax reform, notably the adoption of a national consumption tax and the elimination of the IRS. He also called for the end of the
National Security Agency and various cabinet–level departments but stated that he would keep the

Soft Determinism Vs Libertarianism
Hard determinism and libertarianism are both extreme philosophies with soft determinism (compatibilism) somewhat of a middle ground. Hard
determinism sees very little or no free will for actions, that everything is inevitable. Libertarianism views that every person has free will in their
decisions. Soft determinism states that there is a determined plan of action, but that there is a freedom dependent upon whether that determined action
comes from an internal decision. Decisions are therefore resulting actions come from either external or internal motivations. Based upon the readings
and personal experiences, I would have to say I am a soft–determinist. Looking at the Crash Course video on compatibilism, Hank Green talks about
the factors

Deontological Libertarianism
I.Topic: Libertarianism
II.Definition: Libertarianism is a political philosophy that affirms the rights of individuals to liberty (Vallentyne & van der Vossen, 2014). The basic
idea is the individual is in the best position to know what is best for him or her and should be allowed to make choices without undue outside
interference. Each person has to decide what is in his or her best interest, and the government should not interfere with personal decisions, especially
when it comes to redistribution of wealth and rights (Gibson, 2014, p. 113).
a.Description: Libertarianism is a belief sometimes termed pure justice. It is a system providing open opportunities to all assuming that any resulting
distribution will necessarily be fair (Gibson, 2014, p. 113).
i.The key concepts of libertarianism is the belief of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Deontological libertarianism is rights–based from Robert Nozick who stated, "liberty upsets patterns". This was due to the state justifying formulaic
distributions based on some predetermined principle (Gibson, 2014, p. 113).
IV.Application: Ethical Decision Making and Conflicts of Responsibility
a.Evidence: Subjective and Objective Responsibilities as a Public Administrator
i.Objective responsibility involves two dimensions: accountability and imposed obligation. It involves responsibility to someone or come collective
body and responsibility for certain tasks, subordinate personnel, and goal achievement (Cooper, 2012, p. 73) ii. Subjective responsibility is within the
libertarian belief of an expression of our beliefs, personal and professional values, and character traits (Cooper, 2012, p. 72)
b.Relevance to Conflicts of Responsibility in authority, role and interest The fiduciary character of public service involves responsibility to act on
behalf of the citizenry (Cooper, 2012, p. 94)
i.Conflict of Authority imposed by two or more sources of authority such as law, organizational superiors, elected official and the public (Cooper, 2012,
p.

How Libertarianism Is Not A Sound Philosophy
Libertarianism, by definition, is "a collection of political philosophies that takes individual liberty to be the primary political value. They contend that
the scope and powers of government should be constrained so as to allow each individual as much freedom of action as is consistent with a like
freedom for everyone else" (Boaz). While there are many arguments on either side of the spectrum, the important thing to remember is that
libertarianism is not a sound philosophy. The idea behind libertarianism is what is good for the individual is good for all. This clearly is not, and
cannot be the case because not everyone behaves in a way that benefits the greater good. What people promoting this belief do not realize is there
will never be a government that works perfectly according to their standards, because it relies on human nature. Those promoting libertarianism
essentially want to be treated like adults by the government in all aspects, rather than a child. The problem with this is that not everyone acts and
behaves as an adult. This premise can only work if everyone behaves as such. This idea might work in an ideal, utopian society, but in a realistic
society, it cannot work. There are several arguments to be made against the idea of libertarianism. First, that the premise of a "small government" is
unrealistic and impractical.
First, Libertarians promote the idea of a small government, or even no government at all. The idea of living under no government is,

Libertarianism Vs Libertarianism
Sexual Morality– When addressing sexual morality, there are two perspectives that are always in conflict with each other, the Traditional View and the
Libertarian view. The Traditional Views base its merits on biblical text and the application of that text. The Libertarian view concerns itself by focusing
on autonomy. While both may have strong convictions on how society should conduct themselves behind closed doors, the two sides are far from
flawless, we must all select the side in which we are more morally content.
When choosing a position on this topic, I would feel most comfortable with the Libertarian view. The Libertarian view coincides with the Kantian
moral principle of "Respect for Persons". To respect a person, you must acknowledge ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This new technology allows the accused to be exonerated when wrongfully accused. Capital punishment should only be served to murderers. If you
take a life, you should pay with your own. I agreement with this is a moral Kantian's principle "eye for an eye". If a life is taken, the offender should
not have the luxury of living even with limit privileges. The offense not only ended the life of someone else, but altered the lives of many that were
associated with the life that was taken. My agreement is opposing to the principle of Utilitarianism and suffering. The goal of Utilitarianism is to limit
suffering and increase happiness and

Conservatism Vs Libertarianism
"The government has always been seen as a necessity in modern society. Many liberals and even conservatives have argued for more government
control than America currently has. Libertarianism is a combination of liberalism and conservatism with a very extreme view on how little government
America should have. Conservatarianism is the combination of all three political parties: democratic, republican, and libertarian. To sum it up, the
conservatarian movement is a less extreme libertarianism version. Conservatarisnism focuses on personal freedom to an extent. The United States of
America should adopt a Conservatarian society to ensure civil liberties are properly given to all and to put more dollars into AmericanГўв‚¬в„ўs
pockets.
The main subject ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Some view income tax as a theft. One works for your money at the job they choose to have with the skills they took the time to get, and at this job
when they earn money, the government takes 20% of it. In the United States of America, people also get taxed at different rates. The more money
you make the higher percentage of taxes get taken out of your paycheck, which completely takes out incentives to go for a higher salary or get a
raise, and even worse, the top 1% gets tax breaks so most donГўв‚¬в„ўt even pay taxes. All political parties have ridiculed taxes for years. Libertarians
want to completely take out taxes, liberals want to raise them for the rich, and conservatives want to cut government spending. Conservatarians again
combine all three ideas. Conservatarians donГўв‚¬в„ўt want to completely take out taxes, but they will significantly lower them. Conservatarians will
charge all people the same percentage of taxes, forcing rich people to pay these taxes. Lastly, conservatarians will almost completely cut government
spending. A conservatarian world takes a lot of research to realize that it will work. There are a lot of things we live with that most think we
canГўв‚¬в„ўt live without. Public amenities are a big one. The government funds pools, libraries, school events, local city events, city fairs, and much
more. A big argument is if we stop government funding on these, they will cease to exist. However, if these are privatised, price will go down and
quality will go up. If privately funding, competition will exist. Competition creates innovation. With government funded amenities, there is no
competition, meaning there is no incentive for these places to drive down prices or to improve quality. Privately funded amenities thrive on making
the highest quality product for the lowest price. There will be more improvements and lower prices if public amenities were private. However,

Philosophy Of Libertarianism
Over this winter semester, we have studied an array of different political philosophies under which a person could relate to. After examining them
further I have found that I closely relate to the political philosophy of libertarianism. I associate with this political philosophy because it states that
each person owns him or herself, that is something I agree with. Each person should have a right to their own body and be able to do with it what
they want. After being able to take a closer look, I have also realized that I agree with a majority of the ideas that a libertarian does. I do believe that
a person who is a prostitute should have the right to do with their body as they want and not be legally charged for it. It is that person's decision

The Pros And Cons Of Universal Determinism
Everyday we make choices about what we wear, what we eat, and what we do. However, are we actually making these decisions? One of the greatest
debates in philosophy, and life is if we are truly free or not. Many philosophers have made arguments that we make our own choices while others have
decided that other forces outside of ourselves predetermine are choices. Universal Determinism is the theory that every occurrence in the universe is
determined before it ever happened. This means that every choice you made since you woke up this morning was determined prior to ever making that
decision. This poses an apparent threat to the idea that our actions are free because the thesis of Universal Determinism means we do not have free will
and all the choices that we have made and will make have already been decided by a force outside of ourselves. If Universal Determinism is true all
of our actions can be predicted. Freedom of action is acting in a way that you could have done differently while freedom of will is having the will
to choose what you want to do. When philosophers discuss free will, they are actually questioning freedom of action; despite being a question of
freedom of action, philosophers actually call it freedom of will. Philosophers have separated into two groups of debate in the conversation of free will
Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. These philosophers of Compatibilism and Incompatibilism, which can be separated into Hard Determinism and
Libertarianism

Pros And Cons Of Libertarianism
For this essay I shall explain libertarianism in a general sense, observing its aims and ideals for society, what a government's role is in this society
and what common views libertarians may share. I will conclude with identifying a plausible form of this political philosophy based on the idealist
merits it puts forward to form a society based on personal freedom.
Libertarianism in a general sense is the view that every individual has the right to live their life in any which way they may choose, so long as they
hold respect for the equal rights of others. A Libertarian government defends every individual's right to life, liberty, and property, observing that all
people hold this as a natural born right. Libertarians hold the view that, all individuals' relationships should be voluntary; and the main actions that
should be restricted and punishable by law are those that involve use of coercion against another or remove or impose on the rights of another in any
such way. A Libertarian is one who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state (What is Libertarian? 2013).
As a political philosophy Libertarianism aims towards the upholding of everyone's personal liberties as its main principle. Classical Libertinism is built
on the idea ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Such a theory was produced with thoughts towards the individual being motivated by their own interests and being able to live their lives as the
individuals that they are, to better themselves and be able to make sensible decisions and take responsibility for the consequences of their actions while
living life according to their own values. Libertarianism promotes all this while inhibiting the only negative possibility of autonomous action, the
ability to affect others negatively (What is Libertarian?

New Technologies Libertarianism
New Technologies and Libertarianism
Anders Dahl There are many ways to say the same thing, and libertarians are not unanimous in the answer of "What is libertarianism?" As the name
implies, libertarianism is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its core principal objective (Wiki). Libertarians believe that each person owns
his own life and property and has the right to make his own choices regarding the two – as long those decisions do not infringe on the equal rights of
others (The Advocates). Ron Paul, former congressman and 3–time Presidential candidate, states it as "the core of libertarianism is respect for the life,
liberty and property rights of each individual. This means that no one may initiate force against another, as that violates those natural rights. While
many claim adherence to this principle, only libertarians apply the non–aggression axiom to the state." (The Advocates). Libertarians are proponents of
negative rights – rights not to be subjected to an action of another person or group – such as the ones seen in the Bill of Rights (Koenig). They believe
such civil liberties to be fundamental to a person's well being. Thus, to protect their rights, Libertarians trust minimal government and want government
out of as many things as possible (Koenig). The libertarian way of thinking can be applied to new ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It could create a job shortage in the workforce. People in higher positions would still benefit, but the white collar worker would not be needed for
day–to–day business operations (ART). This is a case where libertarianism might fall short. One cannot take care of oneself if there are no jobs.
Libertarians hope that jobs will be displaced and not replaced. Libertarianism can also be used to mold solutions to other problems – personal privacy
on the

Akash Shankar Richard Pulling 7–23–2015 Philosophy Are You Free The concept of determinism, compatibilism and libertarianism is truly trying to
explain if we are free and if so how much. Some of us believe that we are the masters of our fate, our soul while others believe our destiny is
predetermined and that we are bound to a certain set goal in life. The concepts of determinism, compatibilism and libertarianism try to help aid in that
discussion and help enlighten us on what we believe is the correct ideology. It is therefore extremely important to define what each of these three
concepts mean before comparing and contrasting the various arguments that each present. First off is determinism, this is a view that every event,
including human... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
For example the deterministic view has one major weak side that is clearly seen in the Loeb and Leopold case. Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold
were two young men who had privileged families and attended the best schools. However they murdered a fourteen year old boy to experience the
thrill of killing someone. The public wanted the death penalty to be handed down but attorney Clarence Darrow fought and won a life
imprisonment verdict (Chaffee 177).The attorney employed a hard determinist argument to show the judge that his clients were victims of
circumstance and they were beyond their own control. He even says in the trial that nature is strong and she is pitiless. She works in her own
mysterious way, and we are her victims (Chaffee 177). His argument obviously worked as the two young men were not sentenced to death. This one
case in my opinion shows how determinism does not make sense to me. I absolutely believe that the environment and the way were brought up has
an effect on how we act on the decisions we make. But at the end of the day I also believe that we should be fully help responsible for the actions that
we make. These two young men in my opinion should have been punished to the full degree. The deterministic argument puts too much emphasis on
the environment and other factors instead of one's self in my opinion. I could be taught and raised to steal my entire life, yes I may have been

Libertarianism Persuasive Speech
Four hours into my first Libertarian National Convention I wandered into a crowded hotel suite filled with sweaty young men drinking Carlo Rossi
and found myself face to face with John McAfee, internet pioneer, Libertarian candidate for president and former international fugitive. One thing led
to another, and soon I was asking him a rather direct question: Had he killed a man?
It wasn't something I'd expected to address, not least because political journalists are often resigned to the fact that their access to a candidate will be
restricted by any number of communications aides, but Libertarians have no such norms. As Starchild – a San Francisco–based activist and erotic
services provider, dressed one day in a Speedo and a see–through raincoat ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He's chosen another former Republican governor as a running mate, one with fundraising bona fides, and is seen by many as the great tan hope of the
Libertarian Party, a man who, as Johnson recently described himself to a crowd of the faithful, might be able to take "your weekly meeting that's
occurring in the tree house" and move it to an auditorium.
"I think 30 million people here are up for grabs that are probably Libertarian; it's that they just don't know it," he said to me.
In other words, Gary Johnson is looking to make libertarianism normal. In the year of Trump, Bernie Sanders and flipping the system the bird, he
might just have a shot. Still, it all depends on how weird Americans are willing to let things get.
Johnson, 63, hasn't even been a Libertarian all that long. He was a Republican when he served as New Mexico's governor from 1994 to 2003, but he
switched party affiliations in late 2011 and won the 2012 Libertarian nomination for president. Along with his running mate Judge Jim Gray, something
of a movement hero for his efforts to legalize marijuana in California, Johnson got more than 1 million votes, a party

The idea of free will is something that has been debated for a very long time. Some believe that we have it, while some believe we don't. Some
believe that free will is an illusion and others believe that humans are responsible for what they do and as a result they have free will. In the
scenario of choosing pizza over yogurt and then feeling guilty because I could've had yogurt instead I believe, that it would be reasonable for me to
blame myself because I could have indeed chosen the yogurt over the pizza. In arguing this, I am taking the side of the libertarian who believes that we
have free will. I believe that I would be responsible for choosing the pizza over the yogurt because I didn't have to. I had the option to not take the pizza
Richard Taylor argues that all things are unavoidable and things may only seem like they're avoidable when they're not. Taylor argues that we
don't know what will happen in the future and whatever does happen is something we can't stop because it will occur one way or another. An
objection to this would be that while we can say something is going to happen it doesn't have to happen. The example that is used in the "Fatalism"
article is the death of President Kennedy. It was true that he was going to be murdered. But that doesn't mean that the time and place that he died
were unavoidable like Taylor argues. Something can always be stopped or changed even if it isn't. Therefore it is not unavoidable because it is fate,
the event happens because no one decides to stop even though they can. In the scenario with the pizza, I don't have to eat the pizza. I can stop myself
from choosing it, but I decide not to. So it's not fate that I chose the pizza over the yogurt it's just me deciding that I care more about acting on my
desires even though I know it's unhealthy than choosing the yogurt knowing it's better for my

How Libertarianism Is The Best Of The Three Views
The aim of this essay is to prove that Libertarianism is the best of the three views, which refers to the idea of human free will being true, that one is
not determined, and therefore, they are morally responsible. This essay will be strengthened with the views and arguments on C.A. Campbell.
Campbell demonstrates that one could have done otherwise and one is the sole author of the choices they make. I will present a few arguments in the
essay in support of Libertarianism and attempt to rebut the views of others in this process. . As a result, this essay will prove that you are held morally
responsible for any act that you perform.The Libertarian view consists of one's actions not being determined, which means that a person would have ...
A prime example of these inner acts can be seen in a decision for a teen to decide to smoke a cigarette. Two teens are given the same opportunity in
smoking their first cigarette. The first teen comes from a bad upbringing with questionable role models in their life, the second teen comes from a good
home and from parents who have instilled strong moral values. After reviewing both teens environments one would most likely come to the conclusion
that the first teen with the poor upbringing would smoke and the teen with the good home life would resist the urge to smoke. This conclusion may
well be correct but from the aspect of a Libertarian the end result of whether these two teens choose to smoke has no correlation on whether they have
free will. According to Campbell, ' When we decide to exert moral effort to resist a temptation, we feel quite certain that we could withhold the effort;
just as, if we decide to withhold the effort and yield to our desires, we feel quite certain that we could exert it– otherwise we should not blame
ourselves afterwards for having succumbed" (Campbell). When we apply Campbell 's views to the teens issue of smoking we can see why the final
choice these teens make on whether to smoke doesn 't matter. It is indeed the inner struggle to resist smoking that matters. If both teens struggle with
the decision to smoke that means that both have the opportunity

Determinism, Compatibilism And Libertarianism
Are we in control of our life decision? Or is our life just a script we follow? The question of free will has stumped philosophers for years, in which
philosophers have disagreed on the conclusion. There are several perspectives on this issue, the most popular of which are determinism, compatibilism
and libertarianism. By discussing the similarities and differences of these perspectives, as well as the strengths and weaknesses, we can determine
which of these is most accurate. Determinism is "the view that every event, including human actions, is brought about by previous events in accordance
with universal causal laws that govern the world" (Chaffee 173), which would point to the idea that we do not have free will. Those who support the ...
Fear is that determinism can cause people to have the mentality that they can do whatever they want without consequence.Why take responsibility for
your actions, if they cannot control them? This belief can be seen regarding the case of Michael Ross, who was on trial for multiple murders, in which
he is quoted by saying "Each murder was a fluke–at least that's what I told myself. I knew that I was a "good" person, that I tried to help people, and
certainly I didn't want to hurt anybody" (Fischer 1). Notice he mentions that he did not want to hurt anybody, which is the key because this
supports the idea that he was good at heart but could not control his actions. In other words, a murderer's act is not evil, because people are not
naturally evil, rather life is simply a random course of events which we cannot control. Ross goes on by saying "I made myself believe that there
was an excuse and that it would never happen again. And the contradiction that is it did happen again, and again, was ignored because it didn't fit in
with my perception of myself" (Fischer 1). Ross had a new sentence hearing ordered because doctors thought he suffered from a mental disorder
(Fischer 2), which starts the debate of mental illness. That the fact mental illness exists would support the idea of determinism, in which people have
no freedom and are victim of their illness. Of course the concern is that people may make this up in an attempt to get away from a crime, that they

Philosophy Of Libertarianism
Libertarianism is one of the political philosophy in which liberty is considered as the major driver objective guiding all the actions involved. The
libertarians philosophy look forward to enhancing autonomy of decision making, freedom to make choices, freedom in the political arena, free will to
the association as well as individual judgment primacy. Diverse schools of libertarian thought have different views concerning the actual state's
functions and those of the private power. It seeks to dilute social institutions that use coercion to see things done (Huebert). Libertarianism upholds
personal liberty at all levels. Persons are free to make choices and have to accept responsibilities for the outcomes of their decisions. Individuals have ...
Kantian outlines that though some actions might be legally viable and acceptable, they are immoral or against the religious and traditional beliefs
and customs. The principle that states that "A person should be allowed to marry any other person that person wants to marry." According to the law,
the principle is legal and acceptable (Machan). In addition, libertarians warmly welcome the idea. However, gay or same sex marriage involves
unnatural acts, which are morally unacceptable, are ethically rotten, and are condemned by many religions, cultures, and traditions. The initial purpose
for marriage is for companionship and procreation. The aspect of procreation is missing in the aspect of gay marriages. In Christianity and Islam
teachings, marriage is an avenue for procreation and should involve people of different sex. Consequently, Christianity and Islam among other
religions do not accept gay marriages at any point. Similarly, Kantian in his view states that even if some actions are legal, they have wrong and
immoral perception and hence should not be allowed in our

Persuasive Essay On Libertarianism

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Bella Bell

More from Bella Bell (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Persuasive Essay On Libertarianism