Post
Topic
Board Politics & Society
Re: Phillip Rahvin: on 'Social Contracts'
by
VogueBlackheart
on 07/01/2013, 02:06:03 UTC
The Anarchists/Anarcho-[whatever] guys keep talking about fundamentals, yet they'd fail to recognise one if even if their life depended on it.

In order for contracts to be possible in a society, there almost certainly needs to be some foundation upon which all contracts are built. Sure, it might be circular reasoning for such a foundation to use the word 'contract' in its own name. However, that does not invalidate the need for the foundation. GNU/Linux projects use recursive names all the time. The "Social Contract" could simply be renamed "Social Requirement", and Rahvin's entire spiel is rendered irrelevant. Thus, the OP commits that most heinous of crimes: THE FALLACY FALLACY Wink

Similarly, Anarcho-Capitalists and Libertarians routinely commit further acts of intellectual dishonesty whenever they claim "the free market" will solve all the world's problems, but vigorously deny that Capitalism requires any foundation whatsoever on which it has to be built. Civilisation? Peacefulness? A common language? Ha! It's all natural, they say -- given the inherent evilness of all forms of government, governments cannot take any credit for having helped to bring mankind into the 21st century. Your fallacy is...

Tell me, where do you go to buy Capitalism??

parag. 1: ad hominem

parag. 2: question begging (circularity)

parag. 3: straw man/argument by stereotype/misuse of website

parag. 4: non-sequitur