Page 1 of 1

Too supportive of the "Leviathan"?

Posted: April 1st, 2015, 5:43 pm
by Scott
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.

Re: Too supportive of the "Leviathan"?

Posted: April 5th, 2015, 6:10 am
by Lagayscienza
I haven't got to that bit yet, Scott, but I did get the book on my kindle and started reading it today and will get back to you on the "Leviathan". I'm onto chapter two and what I've read so far has been music to my ears. But no sign yet of the "Leviathan".