Re: Anarchia
Inviato da Ashoka il 8/11/2006 10:18:49
Stando a quanto mi ha detto Ashoka in passato, gli anarco-capitalisti hanno esteso la cencezione di profitto agli ambiti non economici.
In realtà ti avevo detto che la concezione di “cosa è profitto” varia di uomo in uomo e non necessariamente indica un ritorno “economico” (in termini M-D-M+)
Cmq invece di leggere Piombini, per comprendere l'anarco capitalismo credo sia più proficuo leggere Rothbard, no?
THE DISTINCTIVE AND CRUCIAL FEATURE in the study of man is the concept of action. Human action is defined simply as purposeful behavior. It is therefore sharply distinguishable from those observed movements which, from the point of view of man, are not purposeful. These include all the observed movements of inorganic matter and those types of human behavior that are purely reflex, that are simply involuntary responses to certain stimuli. Human action, on the other hand, can be meaningfully interpreted by other men, for it is governed by a certain purpose that the actor has in view.Thepurpose of a man’s act is his end; the desire to achieve this end is the man’s motive for instituting the action.
All human beings act by virtue of their existence and their nature as human beings.We could not conceive of human beings who do not act purposefully, who have no ends in view that they desire and attempt to attain. Things that did not act, that did not behave purposefully, would no longer be classified as human. It is this fundamental truth—this axiom of human action— that forms the key to our study. The entire realm of praxeology and its best developed subdivision, economics, is based on an analysis of the necessary logical implications of this concept.4 The fact that men act by virtue of their being human is indisputable and incontrovertible. To assume the contrary would be an absurdity. The contrary—the absence of motivated behavior— would apply only to plants and inorganic matter.
Ashoka
In realtà ti avevo detto che la concezione di “cosa è profitto” varia di uomo in uomo e non necessariamente indica un ritorno “economico” (in termini M-D-M+)
Cmq invece di leggere Piombini, per comprendere l'anarco capitalismo credo sia più proficuo leggere Rothbard, no?
THE DISTINCTIVE AND CRUCIAL FEATURE in the study of man is the concept of action. Human action is defined simply as purposeful behavior. It is therefore sharply distinguishable from those observed movements which, from the point of view of man, are not purposeful. These include all the observed movements of inorganic matter and those types of human behavior that are purely reflex, that are simply involuntary responses to certain stimuli. Human action, on the other hand, can be meaningfully interpreted by other men, for it is governed by a certain purpose that the actor has in view.Thepurpose of a man’s act is his end; the desire to achieve this end is the man’s motive for instituting the action.
All human beings act by virtue of their existence and their nature as human beings.We could not conceive of human beings who do not act purposefully, who have no ends in view that they desire and attempt to attain. Things that did not act, that did not behave purposefully, would no longer be classified as human. It is this fundamental truth—this axiom of human action— that forms the key to our study. The entire realm of praxeology and its best developed subdivision, economics, is based on an analysis of the necessary logical implications of this concept.4 The fact that men act by virtue of their being human is indisputable and incontrovertible. To assume the contrary would be an absurdity. The contrary—the absence of motivated behavior— would apply only to plants and inorganic matter.
Ashoka
Messaggio orinale: https://old.luogocomune.net/site/newbb/viewtopic.php?forum=52&topic_id=1146&post_id=60672