Argumentation Ethics in Two Minutes - Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Summary

Argumentation ethics, developed in 1988 by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, asserts that arguing for ethical positions contrary to libertarian anarchism and the non-aggression principle is logically incoherent. Hoppe, a professor emeritus at the University of Nevada Las Vegas and senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, argues that debate inherently presupposes non-violence. Thus, advocating for violence in resolving conflicts contradicts the norms required for argumentation, leading to a 'performative contradiction.' Responses to this theory have been mixed, particularly among Hoppe's colleagues at the Mises Institute.

Takeaways

• 🎶 The video contains a combination of music and laughter at certain points.
• 📜 Argumentation ethics is a libertarian political theory developed in 1988 by Hans-Hermann Hoppe.
• 🏫 Hoppe is a professor emeritus at the University of Nevada Las Vegas and a senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute.
• 📚 The theory attempts to prove that any argument against libertarian anarchism and the non-aggression principle is logically incoherent.
• 🤔 Responses to argumentation ethics have primarily come from Hoppe's colleagues at the Mises Institute, with mixed reception.
• 💬 Hoppe argues that both parties in a debate must accept certain norms, such as non-violence, to engage in argumentation.
• ⚖️ He claims that arguing for violence as a means of resolving conflicts creates a performative contradiction between one's actions and words.
• 🚫 Hoppe concludes that arguing against libertarian anarchism and the non-aggression principle is logically inconsistent.
• 🔗 The core of his argument is that argumentation presupposes non-aggression, making arguments for violence self-defeating.
• 📖 The idea of performative contradiction plays a central role in Hoppe's defense of libertarian ethics.

Q & A

What is argumentation ethics?

Argumentation ethics is a libertarian political theory developed by Hans-Hermann Hoppe in 1988. It seeks to prove that arguing for any ethical position other than libertarian anarchism and the non-aggression principle is logically incoherent.

Who developed argumentation ethics?

Argumentation ethics was developed by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, a professor emeritus at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and a senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute.

What is the central claim of argumentation ethics?

The central claim is that arguing for any ethical position that contradicts libertarian anarchism and the non-aggression principle results in a performative contradiction. This means that the argument itself violates the norms presupposed by argumentation, such as non-violence.

What is a performative contradiction?

A performative contradiction occurs when someone's actions contradict the propositions they are arguing for. In the context of argumentation ethics, it refers to arguing for the use of violence while presupposing peaceful norms of debate.

Why does Hoppe argue that advocating violence is a performative contradiction?

Hoppe argues that advocating for violence in a debate is a performative contradiction because argumentation inherently presupposes non-violent norms. By promoting violence, a person contradicts the peaceful nature of debate they are participating in.

What ethical positions are deemed logically incoherent by Hoppe's argumentation ethics?

According to Hoppe, ethical positions that oppose libertarian anarchism and the non-aggression principle are logically incoherent, as they contradict the norms presupposed during the act of argumentation.

How has the argumentation ethics theory been received by others?

The reception of argumentation ethics has been mixed, particularly among Hoppe's colleagues at the Mises Institute. Some have supported the argument, while others have expressed skepticism.

What norms does argumentation presuppose according to Hoppe?

According to Hoppe, argumentation presupposes norms such as non-violence and mutual respect, as these are necessary for rational debate and discourse.

What would be an example of a performative contradiction in argumentation?

An example of a performative contradiction would be someone arguing that violence is a valid means of resolving disputes while engaging in peaceful, rational debate. Their participation in the debate contradicts their advocacy of violence.

What does Hoppe mean by libertarian anarchism and the non-aggression principle?

Libertarian anarchism advocates for a stateless society where individuals are free from coercion, while the non-aggression principle holds that initiating force or violence against others is morally wrong. Hoppe argues these are the only coherent ethical principles within argumentation.