The most relevant thing you reminded me of is, in any philosophical difference of opinion, start with the basic things we can agree on and then explore where and how we diverge. In today's world, the vast majority do not want to even consider or acknowledge that opposing viewpoints can still have some level of commonality. The prevailing belief is, if you do not agree with everything I say, you are my moral and mortal enemy.
2nd gen Korean American born and raised on the East coast. I don't even speak the language much to the dismay of my parents, but you're right. Would never happen. Not in a million years.
Hi John, great video. Just as a note, the Non-Aggression Principle is a policy framework for libertarians, not a moral one. For instance, while we believe it is your right to consume heroin to the point of ruining your life, we don’t exactly believe that is the best choice for yourself at all - we simply believe you should not be put in jail for possessing/consuming something.
@@ASPextra My point is that while I agree the actions of the individual in your example is reprehensible (moral), I don't believe it's to the point it would necessitate being incarcerated (policy), because he did not violate the non-aggression principle. The non-aggression principle only applies to who should go to jail and who should not - it is not a framework of how to live the best life.
I’m American and there’s no way I take that deal unless I need the money to save the life of a family member and then I’m still looking for a way HE slaps me and we still get paid…
The most relevant thing you reminded me of is, in any philosophical difference of opinion, start with the basic things we can agree on and then explore where and how we diverge. In today's world, the vast majority do not want to even consider or acknowledge that opposing viewpoints can still have some level of commonality. The prevailing belief is, if you do not agree with everything I say, you are my moral and mortal enemy.
And that’s because the Left insists on politicizing everything. It’s always been them, and they teach this stance in High Schools and College.
Yeah and that's a real problem and keeps us from being able to disagree without being jerks! :)
2nd gen Korean American born and raised on the East coast. I don't even speak the language much to the dismay of my parents, but you're right. Would never happen. Not in a million years.
Ha holy smokes. I watch asp all the time and my first time clicking on one of these vids and I get the fkn the dead chkn one 😂
Hi John, great video. Just as a note, the Non-Aggression Principle is a policy framework for libertarians, not a moral one. For instance, while we believe it is your right to consume heroin to the point of ruining your life, we don’t exactly believe that is the best choice for yourself at all - we simply believe you should not be put in jail for possessing/consuming something.
It’s rooted in moral decision making though.
@@ASPextra My point is that while I agree the actions of the individual in your example is reprehensible (moral), I don't believe it's to the point it would necessitate being incarcerated (policy), because he did not violate the non-aggression principle. The non-aggression principle only applies to who should go to jail and who should not - it is not a framework of how to live the best life.
I just laughed out loud when you presented that moral conundrum. Then beyond the absurdity of it all I started thinking.
The absurdity of it is part of the interest!
I’m American and there’s no way I take that deal unless I need the money to save the life of a family member and then I’m still looking for a way HE slaps me and we still get paid…