Activity

 6 unchanged lines collapsed
I think Binswanger is invoking the fallacy of the stolen concept here: he claims libertarians logically rely on a concept they reject. Clearly, as international relations have shown time and again, that is not the case. There are certain mechanisms such as, again, the discipline of constant dealings, which exist independently of any particular association between people. When someone reneges on his word, he diminishes his ability to do business in the future. That’s inherent in the logic of the situation, without any definition or creation by people. *It is not necessary for people to create rules of engagement before engaging.* It’s helpful, sure, but certain rules of engagement exist *a priori*.priori*.↵
↵
See also #16 and my application of Karl Popper’s *myth of the framework* to this issue: https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/objectivism-vs-the-myth-of-the-framework