Libertarianism In America

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
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

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

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 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

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 Americanâ€™s 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 donâ€™t 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 donâ€™t
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
canâ€™t 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,

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

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.

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

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

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

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. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
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 hard determinism 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

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

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,

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 ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
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

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]"

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

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 ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
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

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,

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

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 ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
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

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 ... Show more
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
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

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

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

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

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

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?

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,

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

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
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

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

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

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.

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

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.

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

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 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

Libertarianism In America

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Jessica Finson

More from Jessica Finson (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Libertarianism In America