Home » Mind & Soul » Libertarian Philosophy » The Transcendental Argument for Collectivism (I)

The Transcendental Argument for Collectivism (I)

© Francois Tremblay

Philosophical discussion and syllogisms are mostly absent from political discussions. Of course, that is to be expected : making one's reasoning clear implies clear thought and clear principles, something that most people do not have when they talk about politics (and yes, I include many libertarians in that category also, although to a lesser extent).

The main strength of philosophy is in forcing us to expose our hidden assumptions, which are usually false. Most arguments that people use in political discussions are implicit. In this way, the libertarian can uproot his own falsities, and those of others, by demonstrating and exposing their deductive origin.

Of course we must always follow rational principles, such as :

* Looking at the evidence, how conclusive it is, and the conclusions it points to.
* Being free to accept any truth, however inconvenient.
* Opting for the most parsimonious explanations.
* Making all our premises clear and evaluating them as we would any other proposition.

And so on and so forth. By looking at the root of a falsehood, we usually find a "generally accepted" bromide that is actually false. For instance, people used to believe in tabula rasa, the notion that people were born with a clean slate, and therefore believed in all kinds of absurd things.

Now that evolution and evolutionary psychology have given us the tools to study the human mind, we can reject the hidden premise of tabula rasa and put genetics and instincts in their proper place as explanatory processes of human behaviour.

A hidden premise underlies a great deal of people's beliefs about collectivism. That is to say, people support collectivism because they think it is the only way society can organize itself and bring about general welfare. Here is what collectivists would say on the topic :

(1) Either we live in a free society, or a controlled society.
(2) I want to live in a controlled society because I wish to live in a secure, prosperous, fair society.

This line of reasoning has a hidden premise. When someone speaks to you in this manner, point out to them that they are banking on a highly dubious hidden premise, as such :

(1) Either we live in a free society, or a controlled society.
(1b) Only a controlled society can best bring about social goods (such as security, prosperous, fairness).
(2) I want to live in a controlled society because I wish to live in a secure, prosperous, fair society.

The copyright of the article The Transcendental Argument for Collectivism (I) in Libertarian Philosophy is owned by . Permission to republish The Transcendental Argument for Collectivism (I) in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.