View Topic

I've recently begun reading one of my old philosophy textbooks, and one of the most disturbing, yet undeniably most interesting topics is the philosophy behind libertarianism, and just how much proponents of the philosophy would tolerate. To illustrate the full implications of the philosophy, my textbook mentions one particular case where a true die-hard proponent of libertarian philosophy would have no grounds to object.

Meet Armin Meiwes then, who caused quite a stir in Germany, and whose conduct exposed quite a serious flaw in the German legal system.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/dec/04/germany.lukeharding

http://www.spiegel.de/international/retrial-delivers-tougher-sentence-german-cannibal-gets-life-for-eating-willing-victim-a-415313.html

What are your thoughts, both on the legal question, and from a philosophical and ethical standpoint?

Libertarians are not necessarily anarchists. Even if you take the view that the only legitimate powers are government are protection of life and preservation of freedom, I think that allowing someone to be literally devoured crosses a line, consent be damned.

I've never been a fan of libertarianism (I say that as a left-wing leaning quasi-socialist).

Libertarians are not necessarily anarchists. Even if you take the view that the only legitimate powers are government are protection of life and preservation of freedom, I think that allowing someone to be literally devoured crosses a line, consent be damned.

Well, the weirdness aside, I don't really see how it is different from assisted suicide. If one wants to draw a line here, one has to fundamentally question the philosophy that our lives and bodies are exclusively our own.

For the record, I don't believe in Libertarianism to begin with.