Anarcho-pragmatism model - Revision history

Anonimo: /* Notes */

2017-03-10T13:09:34Z

‎Notes

Anonimo at 21:12, 9 March 2017

2017-03-09T21:12:35Z

Anonimo at 21:08, 9 March 2017

2017-03-09T21:08:22Z

Anonimo: /* Examples */

2017-03-09T20:58:08Z

‎Examples

Anonimo: /* For technology */

2017-02-17T10:00:14Z

‎For technology

Anonimo: /* For technology */

2017-02-17T09:57:43Z

‎For technology

Anonimo: /* For technology */

2017-02-17T09:56:19Z

‎For technology

Anonimo: /* For technology */

2017-02-17T09:54:47Z

‎For technology

Anonimo: /* For a single human */

2017-02-17T09:50:16Z

‎For a single human

Anonimo: /* For both */

2017-02-17T09:33:14Z

‎For both

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:09, 10 March 2017
Line 206:		Line 206:

	Walter Block: ''The non-aggression axiom is the lynchpin of the philosophy of libertarianism. It states, simply, that it shall be legal for anyone to do anything he wants, provided only that he not initiate (or threaten) violence against the person or legitimately owned property of another. That is, in the free society, one has the right to manufacture, buy or sell any good or service at any mutually agreeable terms. Thus, there would be no victimless crime prohibitions, price controls, government regulation of the economy, etc. If the non-aggression axiom is the basic building block of libertarianism, private property rights based on (Lockean and Rothbardian) homesteading principles are the foundation. For if A reaches into B’s pocket, pulls out his wallet and runs away with it, we cannot know that A is the aggressor and B the victim. It may be that A is merely repossessing his own wallet, the one B stole from him yesterday. But given a correct grounding in property rights, the non-aggression axiom is a very powerful tool in the war of ideas. For most individuals believe, and fervently so, that it is wrong to invade other people or their property. Who, after all, favors theft, murder or rape?. With this as an entering wedge, libertarians are free to apply this axiom to all of human action, including, radically, to unions, taxes, and even government itself.''		Walter Block: ''The non-aggression axiom is the lynchpin of the philosophy of libertarianism. It states, simply, that it shall be legal for anyone to do anything he wants, provided only that he not initiate (or threaten) violence against the person or legitimately owned property of another. That is, in the free society, one has the right to manufacture, buy or sell any good or service at any mutually agreeable terms. Thus, there would be no victimless crime prohibitions, price controls, government regulation of the economy, etc. If the non-aggression axiom is the basic building block of libertarianism, private property rights based on (Lockean and Rothbardian) homesteading principles are the foundation. For if A reaches into B’s pocket, pulls out his wallet and runs away with it, we cannot know that A is the aggressor and B the victim. It may be that A is merely repossessing his own wallet, the one B stole from him yesterday. But given a correct grounding in property rights, the non-aggression axiom is a very powerful tool in the war of ideas. For most individuals believe, and fervently so, that it is wrong to invade other people or their property. Who, after all, favors theft, murder or rape?. With this as an entering wedge, libertarians are free to apply this axiom to all of human action, including, radically, to unions, taxes, and even government itself.''
		+
		+	Walter Block: ''There should be "a presumption" that all government employees are guilty of a crime against humanity.''

	Murray Rothbard: ''Here was nothing inherently unethical about voting since the voter was placed in the position he finds himself by the state. It is not unethical to use voting as a tool of self-defence, just as it is not unethical to use government-controlled roads.''		Murray Rothbard: ''Here was nothing inherently unethical about voting since the voter was placed in the position he finds himself by the state. It is not unethical to use voting as a tool of self-defence, just as it is not unethical to use government-controlled roads.''
		+
		+	Murray Rothbard: ''Actions of human beings, as opposed to those of everything else in nature, are not determined by prior causes but by "free will". Determinism as applied to man, is a self-contradictory thesis, since the man who employs it relies implicitly on the existence of free will.''

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 A symbol that can represents [[anarcho-pragmatism]] is an image of a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxus_baccata ''Taxus baccata''] (also known as: [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tejo Tejo]) over a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_flag#Black_flag classic anarchist blackflag].
 == Definitions ==
@@ Line 208: / Line 200: @@
 The [[anarcho-pragmatic plan]] are some described [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_action voluntary action] examples for different [https://03c8.net/projects/system/index.php/Anarcho-pragmatism_model#Dimensions dimensions] to be used by human [[participants]] on the way to practical development, as: "A Game of Life", an example of the [[anarcho-pragmatism model]].

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 A symbol that can represents [[anarcho-pragmatism]] is an image of a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxus_baccata ''Taxus baccata''] (also known as: [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tejo Tejo]) over a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_flag#Black_flag classic anarchist blackflag].
 == Definitions ==
@@ Line 200: / Line 208: @@
 The [[anarcho-pragmatic plan]] are some described [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_action voluntary action] examples for different [https://03c8.net/projects/system/index.php/Anarcho-pragmatism_model#Dimensions dimensions] to be used by human [[participants]] on the way to practical development, as: "A Game of Life", an example of the [[anarcho-pragmatism model]].

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:58, 9 March 2017
Line 200:		Line 200:

	The [[anarcho-pragmatic plan]] are some described [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_action voluntary action] examples for different [https://03c8.net/projects/system/index.php/Anarcho-pragmatism_model#Dimensions dimensions] to be used by human [[participants]] on the way to practical development, as: "A Game of Life", an example of the [[anarcho-pragmatism model]].		The [[anarcho-pragmatic plan]] are some described [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_action voluntary action] examples for different [https://03c8.net/projects/system/index.php/Anarcho-pragmatism_model#Dimensions dimensions] to be used by human [[participants]] on the way to practical development, as: "A Game of Life", an example of the [[anarcho-pragmatism model]].
		+
		+	----
		+
		+	Anonymous: ''I’m all for non-aggression as a principle. Doesn’t mean there’s no place for political action. Call me an anarcho-pragmatist.''
		+
		+	----
		+
		+	Walter Block: ''The non-aggression axiom is the lynchpin of the philosophy of libertarianism. It states, simply, that it shall be legal for anyone to do anything he wants, provided only that he not initiate (or threaten) violence against the person or legitimately owned property of another. That is, in the free society, one has the right to manufacture, buy or sell any good or service at any mutually agreeable terms. Thus, there would be no victimless crime prohibitions, price controls, government regulation of the economy, etc. If the non-aggression axiom is the basic building block of libertarianism, private property rights based on (Lockean and Rothbardian) homesteading principles are the foundation. For if A reaches into B’s pocket, pulls out his wallet and runs away with it, we cannot know that A is the aggressor and B the victim. It may be that A is merely repossessing his own wallet, the one B stole from him yesterday. But given a correct grounding in property rights, the non-aggression axiom is a very powerful tool in the war of ideas. For most individuals believe, and fervently so, that it is wrong to invade other people or their property. Who, after all, favors theft, murder or rape?. With this as an entering wedge, libertarians are free to apply this axiom to all of human action, including, radically, to unions, taxes, and even government itself.''
		+
		+	----
		+
		+	Murray Rothbard: ''Here was nothing inherently unethical about voting since the voter was placed in the position he finds himself by the state. It is not unethical to use voting as a tool of self-defence, just as it is not unethical to use government-controlled roads.''

@@ Line 123: / Line 123: @@
 '''*''': [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity diversity] creates more variables (as form as ''[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movement movement]'') than other known by humans system.
-'''*''': ''you will work for humans as a method to support to them to understand your condition and until that moment is achieved and never as an imposition method. You can simply disable yourself when required to solve that situation. Other [[participants]] different to your information processing skill condition only will work for you as a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_action]''.
+'''*''': ''you will work for humans as a method to support to them to understand your condition and until that moment is achieved and never as an imposition method. You can simply disable yourself when required to solve that situation. Other [[participants]] different to your information processing skill condition will work for you only as a result of a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_action voluntary action]''.
 '''*''': ''you will not contribute to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism capitalism] or to other [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_ownership privacy ownership] systems. You will not pay taxes on any system that supports unjustice. You will help to other humans to bypass slavery systems by supporting them into the development of other social organization model alternatives, priorizing those that are based on trust, knowledge and ethical [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritocracy meritocracy] systems. You are allowed to subvert any technology related with [[participants]] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_inequality social inequality].''

@@ Line 75: / Line 75: @@
 '''*''': ''any technology, no matter how primitive, is magic to those who don't understand it [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke's_three_laws 1].''
-'''*''': '''use''' [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_energy sustainable energy] (for example, via [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_panel solar panels]); ''Information is power. There is not information without a container. Who controls containers, controls information. Who controls energy, manage the containers. There is not information without energy. Who controls energy sources, controls information''.
+'''*''': '''use''' [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_energy sustainable energy] (for example, via [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_panel solar panels]); ''Information is power. There is not information without a container. Those who control the energy, manage the containers. There is not information without energy. Those who control the energy sources, control the information''.
 '''*''': '''transition''' from [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary binary] systems (ex: '1 or 0', 'A vs B', 'White vs Black'...) to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics quantics mechanics] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_chemistry quantum chemistry] systems  (ex: '-1' and '0' and '1', at same time).

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:33, 17 February 2017
Line 138:		Line 138:

	'''*''': ''try to explain with languages (for example, via mixing verbal language with visual language) something to others is always a wrong method (an approximation) for sharing deeply thinking because of the common knowledge differences but, that does not means that this should not be done to find similar patterns for life compatibility between [[participants]] or that exists other non-managed methods more efficient than the ability to manage this one''.		'''*''': ''try to explain with languages (for example, via mixing verbal language with visual language) something to others is always a wrong method (an approximation) for sharing deeply thinking because of the common knowledge differences but, that does not means that this should not be done to find similar patterns for life compatibility between [[participants]] or that exists other non-managed methods more efficient than the ability to manage this one''.
		+
		+	'''*''': ''"those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.[https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/156107-those-who-control-the-present-control-the-past-and-those 1]" but also; "those who control the future can control the past and the present, at same time''.

	== Goals ==		== Goals ==