Podcast (kinsella-on-liberty): Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:18:49 — 72.2MB)
Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 377.
I appeared last night (March. 15, 2022) on NWJ as we are considering a possible debate between me and David Friedman on the foundations of libertarianism. The original notion suggested was deontology vs. consequentialism but as I was not sure this is appropriate, we had a discussion about this. Along the way we discussed many other topics. Not sure if the debate will take place or makes sense, but this discussion was fun.
See Jose’s subsequent discussion with David Friedman here. David discusses IP around 28 minutes. Also: David Friedman on Intellectual Property; and David Friedman on the “Problem” of Piracy; David Friedman on Copyright; David Friedman: Current Experiments in Self Publishing.
Fun podcast.
Why don’t you like the definition of “morality” as “universally preferable behavior”? Isn’t that what everyone means with it? (And thus the only logically coherent morality is the NAP. (People who believe that condoms are immoral do so on the basis of a radically different view *of reality itself*, so living with them is tricky, perhaps impossible, but this is a separate topic.))
Perhaps the most astonishing thing about Friedman is that he claims in Machinery of Freedom (or some other book – I do not remember with 100% certainty) that copyright is a “well-defined right”.
For the situation where someone on an upper floor fell out the window and grabbed your flag pole and you dont let them in because you view it as aggression against your property, seems like proportional escalation of force would solve it. if the windows locked & you simply dont open it, you technically didnt aggress, however if you use force to prevent him climbing it, then your force which would likely lead to his great injury wouldnt be proportional to the ‘aggression’ of him climbing in.