Too supportive of the "Leviathan"?
Posted: April 1st, 2015, 5:43 pm
Do you think Michael Shermer was too supportive of the "Leviathan" in his book?
I do. So often I found him quickly brushing off something he just condemned as "immoral" by making a double-standard for the state. This seems like a special pleading fallacy. I feel it may have been less blatantly fallacious if Shermer provided an in depth explanation of why an exemption to his moral rules shall be made for a group of people claiming to be a state AND provided an argument to support his repeated ipse dixit that we need a big "Leviathan" to claim a monopoly on the "legitimate" [special pleading fallacy double-standard] use of force.
I do. So often I found him quickly brushing off something he just condemned as "immoral" by making a double-standard for the state. This seems like a special pleading fallacy. I feel it may have been less blatantly fallacious if Shermer provided an in depth explanation of why an exemption to his moral rules shall be made for a group of people claiming to be a state AND provided an argument to support his repeated ipse dixit that we need a big "Leviathan" to claim a monopoly on the "legitimate" [special pleading fallacy double-standard] use of force.