On Sunday, 28 October 2012, I broadcast a new episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, answering questions on circumcision versus female genital mutilation, why anarcho-capitalism is wrong, duties to the government, and more. Greg Perkins of Objectivist Answers was the episode’s co-host.

If you missed the live broadcast, you can listen to audio podcasts of selected questions or the whole episode. You’ll find those posted below, as well as on this episode’s archive page: Q&A Radio: 28 October 2012.

To automatically download every new episode, just subscribe to the Philosophy in Action Podcast RSS Feed in your music player:

Q&A Radio: Episode: 28 October 2012

The Whole Episode

My News of the Week: I’ve been working on minor updates to PhilosophyInAction.com. My lecture on Christianity versus capitalism in Boulder went fabulously well!

Listen or Download:

You can also download or listen to particular questions from this episode.

Question 1: Circumcision Versus Female Genital Mutilation (4:06)

In this segment, I answered a question on circumcision versus female genital mutilation.

Is circumcision on par with female genital mutilation? Many people decry female genital mutilation, but they regard circumcision as the right of parents. Is that wrong?

My Answer, In Brief: Male circumcision is wrong, yet it’s nowhere near the horror of most female genital mutilation, which attempts to utterly destroy a woman’s sexuality.

Listen or Download:

Tags: Children, Circumcision, Ethics, Medicine, Parenting, Rights

Relevant Links:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 2: Why Anarcho-Capitalism Is Wrong (16:42)

In this segment, I answered a question on why anarcho-capitalism is wrong.

What’s wrong with anarcho-capitalism? Libertarian anarchists – such as Murray Rothbard, Roy Childs, and Stefan Molyneux – claim that anarcho-capitalism is the only political system compatible with the “non-aggression principle.” Is that right? Must any government initiate force by excluding competing defense agencies, as anarchists claim? Should governments be abolished in favor of private markets in force?

My Answer, In Brief: Anarcho-capitalism’s ideal of a “market in force” is no way to protect rights. In such a market, force – not just retaliatory force but also initiatory force – will be available for a price. As a result, the wealthy, power-lusting, and violent will be able to impose their will on the rest of us.

Listen or Download:

Tags: Anarchism, Free Society, Government, Law, Politics, Rights, Vigilantism

Relevant Links:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 3: Duties to the Government (1:04:22)

In this segment, I answered a question on duties to the government.

In a free society, would people be obliged to support or obey the government? Ayn Rand defined government as “an institution that holds the exclusive power to enforce certain rules of social conduct in a given geographical area.” She said that a government has – and must have – “a monopoly on the legal use of physical force.” Given that, must a person support the government – morally or financially – in order for his rights to be protected? Would a person have to swear loyalty, pay taxes, vote in elections, or serve in the military? What would be the status of an anarchist – meaning someone who regards all government as illegitimate – in such a society?

My Answer, In Brief: In a free society, your only legal obligation is not to violate rights. So you can refuse to participate in civic life entirely, and the government will leave you alone, so long as you don’t violate rights.

Listen or Download:

Tags: Anarchism, Free Society, Government, Law, Politics, Rights

Relevant Links:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Rapid Fire Questions (1:10:40)

In this segment, Dr. Diana Hsieh answered questions impromptu. The questions were:

  • Isn’t binding arbitration a form of private government?
Listen or Download:

To comment on these questions or my answers, visit its comment thread.

Conclusion (1:12:19)

Thank you for joining us for this episode! If you enjoyed this episode, please contribute to contribute to our tip jar. Also, please submit and vote on questions for upcoming shows in in the question queue.

Support Philosophy in Action

Support
Our Work
Remember, Philosophy in Action Radio is available to anyone, free of charge. We love doing these radio shows, but they’re not free to produce: they require our time, effort, and money – week in and week out. So if you enjoy and value our work, please contribute to our tip jar! You can send your contribution via Dwolla, PayPal, or US Mail.

Follow Philosophy in Action

Philosophy in Action's NewsletterPhilosophy in Action's Facebook PagePhilosophy in Action's Twitter StreamPhilosophy in Action's RSS FeedPhilosophy in Action's YouTube Channel

  • shemsky

    “As a result, the wealthy, power-lusting and violent will be able to impose their will on the rest of us.” How does monopoly government alleviate this? Answer: It doesn’t. In fact, it only makes it worse. It takes away the choice of individuals to be governed as they wish to be governed.

 
Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha