Ethics of Liberty, Chapter 5: The Task of Political Philosophy

Rothbard doesn’t plan on elaborating all of natural law; just the ethics, or the political philosophy, of it. There is considerably more, but it is outside the scope of the book. ロスバードには自然法の全体を説明するつもりは無い。この本では倫理、政治哲学、だけで良い。全体にはもっとあるが、この本の範囲外だ。
He laments that in the twentieth century, the natural law built up to that time (as described in the last chapter, it led to radical movements, which greatly benefited humanity) was largely abandoned for other ideas. Rothbard describes the replacement of political philosophy by political science, echoing earlier references to scientistics, who rejected natural law for being religious and “unscientific.” 二十世紀では前章の抜本的な運動の基本となった自然法が捨てられたことを悲しむ。政治哲学が政治科学に入れ替わられた。第一章の言った科学万能派の思想のように自然法は科学で無い神学であると言われて否定された。
These political scientists follow a method massively unsuited to coming to an understanding of human action: they gather evidence and induce from it theories, then try to use the theories as guides for action. This does not work and cannot work. I think it is possible that no being can come to a perfect scientistic understanding of itself, much less of a society of beings like itself. But Rothbard argues instead that scientistic methods cannot work because humans possess free will, which scientists of the physical laws (whom political scientists attempt to emulate) do not have to grapple with. 政治科学者は人間行動を解明するために沐猴にして冠す方法を使う:情報を集まって、それから推測を帰納して、そして推測で行動を導く。効果は失敗だった。失敗しかできない方法だ。自分を科学的に完璧な解明ができる生き物なんてありえない、と拙者が思う。だがロスバードは自由意志を持つ人類が物理の科学の対象と違って情報集めだけで分かられない。政治科学者は物理の真似をしようとしても不可能だから失敗しかない道だ。
Regardless why the scientistic approach does not and cannot work, the philosophical approach- to use man’s reason to comprehend his nature and the nature of his environment, then to deduce laws of this nature- can and does work. 科学万能派の失敗の理由がどっちにしろ、哲学の方法‐人の理性を使って自身の性質と環境の性質を分かってその性質の法則を演繹する‐は有効だ。

About Brian Wilton

I'm a libertarian. I prefer reading articles and books to listening to podcasts, although I hear that podcasts are more popular. Call it Picard's Syndrome.
Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply