Dmitry Chernikov’s Blog

Hartshorne keeps reproducing the same straw man that classical theism posits a tyrant God who leaves no room for human freedom. Of course, God is nothing of the sort: His power is such that He lures the will, persuades the intellect, and yes, when necessary coerces the body. I have already mentioned that chance or [...]

A repost of my reply to the claim that “[e]conomic libertarianism is protection of the haves at the [expense] of the have-nots”: No, economic libertarianism is allowing every have-not to challenge the economic position of the haves in order himself to become a have. It’s allowing so far unknown and relatively poor individuals to succeed [...]

Hartshorne’s one important rebellion against classical theism consists in his claim that the God of St. Thomas loves through action only and feels no emotions about our human joys and sorrows. “To sorrow… over the misery of others belongs not to God; but it does most properly belong to Him to dispel that misery” (ST, [...]

This is a repost of my comment to If Illegal, Then Immoral? Yes, Romans 13 is part of the Bible and has some authority. But Christ did not, it seems to me, come to teach us political philosophy (although, to be sure, there is no reason why He couldn’t). At the same time, Jesus’s life [...]

In one of his Libertarian Party presidential campaigns the late Harry Browne would ask, “Would you agree to let go of your favorite government program if that meant that everyone else, too, would let go of their favorite government programs?” I thought that was brilliant. A person may lose, because he might, for example, have [...]

In the Preface to his Simple Rules for a Complex World, Richard Epstein wants us to “reexamine some of [our] more cherished assumptions about the relationship between legal rules and social progress.” (xi) Mises saw this relationship long ago: “Nobody can be at the same time a correct bureaucrat and an innovator. Progress is precisely [...]

It seems that I could reply to Dawkins as follows: even though the maxima of qualities can be different, e.g., finite (and if such, then either physically attainable or not) or infinite (and if such, then either potentially or actually infinite), still, these maxima can be identified. Thus, there is indeed a “pre-eminently peerless stinker,” [...]

Thomist explains the Fourth Way in part I and II. The better a thought corresponds to reality, the truer it is. To the more reality a thought corresponds, the truer that thought is. A thought that comprises in itself the whole of reality is the truest. And this thought causes or is the source of [...]

An NT Rational lawmaker will ask: “What is the best and most efficient way to select local government officials?” And answer, e.g.: “By popular vote.” Having adopted the law, an NF Idealist will ask: “Ought I or you to vote?”; “Is it one’s duty to vote?” Now it would seem that the connection between the [...]

If it is asked, “Why must I, a player, obey the rules of baseball?,” the answer must obviously be, “Because only then will you have an enjoyable game or even a game at all.” So, if it occurred to an act utilitarian that the best way toward happiness is to play some baseball, then he [...]

A baseball game is a consumer good which works according to some set of rules set forth in an official manual. So does a DVR or a car. In order enjoy the game, one must “program” the players to behave predictably and learn the rules oneself. (So, again, a game is a simple abstraction from [...]

Is there a difference between rules of baseball and rules of morality? If we consider their purpose, then the answer is yes and no: the goal of the baseball rules is ultimately to create an interesting and challenging game for the entertainment of the players and spectators. The rules of baseball serve to attain a [...]

Introspective understanding is the unity of knowledge. It’s a picture of how all things fit together. Unity is a condition for harmony within some complex system that is working smoothly “as one” without, however, necessarily having a real identity. The paradigmatic cases of such a system is the free market and the human body. Sensing [...]

Here’s Mises interpreting Marx: “The capitalists, in their subconsciousness ashamed of the mean greed motivating their own conduct and anxious to avoid social disapproval, encouraged their sycophants, the economists, to proclaim doctrines which could rehabilitate them in public opinion.” (Human Action, 78) Marx was in many ways right in his denunciation, except that he got [...]

Have the Federal Reserve buy up the entire country, that is, the assets of every public and private firm, quiet like. It’s really a piece of cake.

1. NF Idealists impose a constraint on SP Artisans as to how the latter live their lives: their lives must be a story, have an identity. More important, they must be true to their own artistic visions. On the other hand, SPs impose an imperative on NFs: they must fight for what they believe in. [...]

A promise seems to put one under an obligation to do as promised. There are two useful definitions of promising: the first makes the obligation a part of its essence, e.g. “promise is an oath that one ought to fulfill”; the other makes the obligation a part of its virtue, e.g., “promise is a declaration [...]

NT Rationals are masters of the law, discovering or legislating it for society as a whole. SP Artisans are servants of the law, being manipulated or steered by it into socially beneficial venues. The latter can have their freedom and artistic creativity within the network of laws. Similarly, NF Idealists are masters of duty, prescribing [...]

For the following exercise I assume that we are all good at playing trains. So, suppose that on the first track of the trolley lies Ron Paul, and on the second track lie Lew Rockwell, Tom Woods, Bob Higgs, David Gordon, and Joseph Salerno all tied up by the mustachioed villain Statist Ideology. You can’t [...]

1. The first argument for God’s existence is from “the first designing cause.” A is designed by B; B, by C; etc. There must then be a being which is undesigned but who is the author of nature. Now a designer is by definition intelligent. Since design is purposeful arrangement of parts, either (1) God’s [...]