It’s tempting when debating those with statist ideologies to just throw your hands in the air and shout, “Well how would you feel if someone wanted to tell you how to live your life?” It’s tempting, but dangerous.
Why? Because emotions are not logical, i.e., they are not argumentative primaries. When responding that way, you play into the hands of the statists and allow them to respond with things like, “I don’t mind — we live in a democracy. Majority rules,” or, “It doesn’t bother me. The government can use my money to give to others and I’m completely fine with it.”
When defending liberty, it is imperative that one avoid appealing to the very emotions which statists require to win support for their political ideologies:
For one thing, emotions are not primaries. Instead, emotions are the conclusion of a complex set of sensory inputs which are then implicitly read, translated, and comprehended by the brain. Or, in some cases, emotions are elicited through retained sets of these inputs in the form of “memories,” or from internal imaginative extrapolations upon these inputs which are expressed in the real world in the form of art. The output of an emotion, any emotion, is entirely involuntarily in a psychological sense insofar as these processes will occur automatically regardless of whether man is actively engaged in conscious processes of thought or not. Upon examining man’s emotions in a philosophic context, the degree of control which man can exert over exactly which emotions he feels and exhibits in relation to certain inputs becomes apparent. Though this certainly warrants further discussion below, the more immediate point to make is that emotions are secondary responses to the primary foundation of man’s knowledge: metaphysical reality.
Read the full essay here.Published in