I greatly enjoyed Auburn Prof. Roderick T. Long's letter to Reason magazine in the June issue:
...Randy Barnett writes that "there are very few libertarians today for whom consequences are not ultimately the reason why they believe in liberty," while Richard Epstein cheerfully agrees that libertarians are "all consequentialists now." Fortunately, this is not true. I say "fortunately" because consequentialism is philosophically indefensible as a normative theory.
The basic problem with consequentialism is that it recognizes no limit in principle on what can be done to people in order to promote good consequences.
[...]
Many consequentialists will say that they too can accommodate ironclad prohibitions on certain actions, on the grounds that utility will be maximized in the long run if people internalize such prohibitions. This is true, but it misses the point. Once one has internalized an ironclad prohibition, one is by definition no longer a consequentialist. One cannot treat certain values as absolute in practice and still meaningfully deny their absoluteness in theory; a belief that is not allowed to influence one’s actions is no real belief. Most consequentialists are morally superior to their theory and, thankfully, pay it only lip service.
The vast majority of people walking the earth operate under no coherent moral philosophy, and consequentialists are no exception.
Posted by Walter at June 7, 2004 03:36 PMI'd like to say that one can hold a strong belief in freedom, and support it "in principle" for years. But then something experiential gets one off the bench and out on the field to actually fight hard for the principle. Like, say in case of the drug war, your friend gets put in jail for 20 years. So you actually write a letter to the editor instead of just esposing philosophy to your friends. Or, your neighbor is fined $2,500 for remodelling his house. So you go and support your state representative to pass legislation to allow home improvements without restriction. The principle is a constant. Your effort is spurred by the consequences of inaction.
Posted by: Rand Fanshier at June 8, 2004 02:57 PM