It strikes me that that Wikipedia article on libertarianism is badly done. The emphasis on "natural rights" vs "consequentialism" is nothing to lead with. It is a possible interpretation of disagreements, but really, the range of opinion is not limited to this one dimension of metaethics. Norman Barry gets the credit for the distinction, but R.W. Bradford, writing as Ethan O. Waters, is partly responsible for popularizing the distinction.

I remember Bradford writing his early Watersian pieces. I insisted he stop using the word utilitarian as he had started out doing, and switch to consequentialism instead. But in the end I just tugged at my hair and gave up. Bradford wouldn't really break out of this particular simplified, one-dimensional perspective he'd latched onto.

Oh, well. Libertarianism will survive. It's a pity that this particular matrix overlays so many mindsets, though. It's a double pity that it plays such a huge part in the Wikipedia article.

For more on this subject, Liberty published a conference panel on the subject in its first 2005 issue. I've yet to read it.

Leave a comment

Comments:

No Comments for this post yet...

Leave a comment:

Name:

Email:

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.

Site/Url:

Your URL will be displayed.

Comment text:

Allowed XHTML tags: <p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small>

Options:

Auto-BR (Line breaks become <br />)
Remember me (Set cookies for name, email and url)
Allow message form (Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will NOT be displayed.))

Pingbacks:

No Pingbacks for this post yet...