The fundamental question of political philosophy, one that precedes questions about how the state should be organized, is whether there should be any state at all. Why not have anarchy?
Robert NozickRead
The history of philosophy is actually full of people who argue for rather wild and incredible views, and their reputations are based on the skill of arguing for them.
Interpretation
Philosophers often propose extreme ideas, and their influence comes from their ability to defend those ideas effectively.
Robert Nozick highlights that philosophy has a rich history filled with thinkers advocating for unconventional and extraordinary ideas. The significance of these philosophers often lies not necessarily in the truth of their views, but in their persuasive abilities to argue and defend those ideas, illustrating the subjective nature of philosophical debate and the value placed on rhetorical skill.
In practice
During a lecture on philosophical methods, one might cite this quote to emphasize the importance of argumentation skills.
The fundamental question of political philosophy, one that precedes questions about how the state should be organized, is whether there should be any state at all. Why not have anarchy?
Given the complexity of interpersonal relationships and institutions and the complexity of co-ordination of the actions of many people, it is enormously unlikely that, even if there were one ideal pattern for society, it could be arrived at in an a priori fashion. And even supposing that some great genius did come along with a blueprint, who could have the confidence that it could work
There are only individual people, different individual people, with their own individual lives. Using one of these people for the benefit of others uses him and benefits the others. Nothing more. What happens is that something is done to him for the sake of others. Talk of an overall social good covers this up.
And although it might be best of all to be Socrates satisfied, having both happiness and depth, we would give up some happiness in order to gain the depth.
I think philosophers can do things akin to theoretical scientists, in that, having read about empirical data, they too can think of what hypotheses and theories might account for that data. So there's a continuity between philosophy and science in that way.
What else can matter to us, other than how our lives feel from the inside?
I regret, as much as any member, the unavoidable weight and duration of the burdens to be imposed; having never been a proselyte to the doctrine, that public debts are public benefits. I consider them, on the contrary, as evils which ought to be removed as fast as honor and justice will permit.
When humans invented material inequality, they came up with a way of subjugating the low-ranking like nothing ever seen before in the primate world.
Take her away; for she hath lived too long, _x000D_ _x000D_ To fill the world with vicious qualities.
Nothing in the world is permanent, and weβre foolish when we ask anything to last, but surely weβre still more foolish not to take delight in it while we have it.
I deplore the horrible crime as child murder....no matter what the motive, love of ease, or desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent,the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed...but oh, thrice guilty is he who drove her to the desperation which compelled her to the crime.
My case is a species of madness, only that it is a derangement of the Volition, and not of the intellectual faculties.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.