Thanks! I explained in the article but maybe I can clarify or simplify a bit here...
A contractualist believes that the NAP only applies to full moral agents (conscious adult humans of sound mind). Contrariwise, a universalist applies the NAP universally to all sentient individuals, regardless of their age, intelligence, or species.
A libertine is satisfied with only the NAP while a puritan also holds himself and those in his community to strict behavioral standards.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I'm not sure where to put myself in your matrix. I consider myself a Daoist and see many ways in which libertarian anarchism and daoism complement one another although their philosophical focus is quite different.
@chhaylin, how does Daoism differ?
@joeyarnoldvn, libertarian anarchism is very political in nature whereas Daoism describes a personal philosophy of living that would be compatible with anarchist politics. Libertarian anarchism states that government is bad and should not infringe people's freedoms. Daoism at its core is a philosophy on 'relational singularization' - how we, as radical individuals are related to one another and how from there we should live our deeply personal lives, not just our political lives.
I realize it may sound quite unclear. I need to find words to express myself better, and may write an article about it later on. :)
I like what you said here and I agree with it. I like the ideas of Daoism. I like freedoms for individuals in individualism.
How do you like my interpretation of taoism being pretty much the same thing as utilitarian voluntarism?
Hi @samupaha, very nice article. I'm not sure whether we can call Daoism utilitarian. Daoists, to me, seem to me to be negating the conception of utility - or at least, utility for society in general. This is well exemplified in the story of the tree and the carpenter.