Libertarians often insist that human beings are radically autonomous agents, uninfluenced in some crucial respect by the various causes that on a naturalistic understanding of ourselves explain behavior. This view tends to justify a laissez-faire political philosophy, since if people are mostly self-made, there is little society can, and therefore should, do to alleviate the difficulties of those who are unlucky in life. But interestingly enough, libertarians are also mightily concerned to limit government intervention, lest it have too much of an impact in our lives. This suggests that they actually do recognize the power of social and environmental influences, and that the self-originating autonomy they defend is simply a rationalization for keeping government "off our backs." What follow are some exchanges with libertarians, two in Reason magazine, another in the Boston Globe. I then critique of Ayn Rand's Objectivism, and take up the issue of what sort of state, the laissez-faire disciplinarian state, or the mentor state, maximizes liberty.
Libertarianism and the Myth of Radical Autonomy
Articles in this Section
-
A dialog on social responsibility.
-
Commentary Commentary on a George will opinion piece in which he takes government to task for trying to influence character development and personal behavior.
-
A dialog with Tibor Machan.
-
In a world in which all behavior is understood to be fully caused, what justifies retribution?
-
A science-based, objective understanding of ourselves calls into question the basic premises and conclusions of Randian Objectivism.
-
There is no conflict between a scientific understanding of behavior on the one hand and choice and responsibility on the other.