Comments on: LvM L&Sa - I.1.Ownership (6) http://trilema.com/2013/lvm-lsa-i1ownership-6/ Moving targets for a fast crowd. Mon, 25 May 2026 18:43:25 +0000 http://polimedia.us hourly 1 By: LvM L&Sa - I.1.Ownership (7) on Trilema - A blog by Mircea Popescu. http://trilema.com/2013/lvm-lsa-i1ownership-6/#comment-139555 LvM L&Sa - I.1.Ownership (7) on Trilema - A blog by Mircea Popescu. Tue, 07 Jan 2020 00:07:35 +0000 http://trilema.com/?p=50811#comment-139555 [...] evidence - much more likely that group and individual identity evolved together, similarly to the earlier discussed applications of evolution to all other fields. Equally, the presumption that group anything is in [...] [...] evidence - much more likely that group and individual identity evolved together, similarly to the earlier discussed applications of evolution to all other fields. Equally, the presumption that group anything is in [...]

]]> By: Ludwig von Mises' Liberalism and Socialism, adnotated. on Trilema - A blog by Mircea Popescu. http://trilema.com/2013/lvm-lsa-i1ownership-6/#comment-139525 Ludwig von Mises' Liberalism and Socialism, adnotated. on Trilema - A blog by Mircea Popescu. Tue, 07 Jan 2020 00:05:57 +0000 http://trilema.com/?p=50811#comment-139525 [...] 1 - Ownership. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, ———I'm a writer, thus I innovate. If you don't like innovation [...] [...] 1 - Ownership. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, ———I'm a writer, thus I innovate. If you don't like innovation [...]

]]> By: Mircea Popescu http://trilema.com/2013/lvm-lsa-i1ownership-6/#comment-96084 Mircea Popescu Thu, 14 Nov 2013 13:53:48 +0000 http://trilema.com/?p=50811#comment-96084 Yeah, a very unexamined, "intuitive" conceptualisation of violence may well explain his error there. Yeah, a very unexamined, "intuitive" conceptualisation of violence may well explain his error there.

]]> By: pletzalcoatl http://trilema.com/2013/lvm-lsa-i1ownership-6/#comment-96083 pletzalcoatl Thu, 14 Nov 2013 13:24:56 +0000 http://trilema.com/?p=50811#comment-96083 I liked your discussion of what the law is actually there for. I imagine a mistake in lvm's reasoning was a misunderstanding of the scope of violence; probably he wouldn't have seen the effects of adoption of railway stuffs as "violence" as you've put it. I liked your discussion of what the law is actually there for.

I imagine a mistake in lvm's reasoning was a misunderstanding of the scope of violence; probably he wouldn't have seen the effects of adoption of railway stuffs as "violence" as you've put it.

]]>