As I’ve mentioned before, I’ve created Facebook pages for my ongoing projects. So if you support them, please hit the “like” button to help spread the word about them on Facebook.
FIRM: Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine:
Coalition for Secular Government:
Again, if you support any or all of these projects, please “like” them!
This week on We Stand FIRM, the blog of FIRM (Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine):
This week on Mother of Exiles:
This week on the blog of Modern Paleo:
For anyone wishing to ask a question, make a observation, or share a link with NoodleFood readers, I hereby open up the comments on this post to any respectable topic. As always, please refrain from posting inappropriate comments such as personal attacks, pornographic material, copyrighted material, and commercial solicitations.
Law professor Hanah Volokh kindly sent me the following about the law of treason yesterday, in response to my fumbling remarks in last Sunday’s Rationally Selfish Webcast:
I was just listening to your Rationally Selfish Webcast that I missed last weekend. I’m not an expert in the law of treason, but I do know a little bit about it. Treason does not actually require a formal state of war or aid to a declared enemy in war.Black’s Law Dictionary, which is probably the most widely used legal dictionary, defines treason as “the offense of attempting to overthrow the government of the state to which one owes allegiance, either by making war against the state or by materially supporting its enemies.”
The current federal statute criminalizing treason is 18 U.S.C. section 2381, and it reads, “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason . . . .”
Prosecution for things like espionage, terrorist acts, arson, sabotage, and conspiracy are much more common than for treason, though, even if the acts committed are technically within the definition of treason.
A person can commit treason by making war against the state in the absence of a pre-existing war. If you act to overthrow the government, that counts as treason. This idea was behind the actions taken against communists in the U.S. during the 1950s.
Confederate soldiers and government officials also committed treason against the United States even though it was not a declared war. The Confederacy took the legal position that secession was permitted and they were not treasonous because they no longer owed allegiance to the United States. The Union took the legal position that secession was not permitted and the military action was about restoring the union and putting down an illegal rebellion. After reunification, the Confederate soldiers and officials were considered to have committed treason, though the vast majority of them were pardoned.
Right now, America has many undeclared enemies, thanks to its weak and appeasing foreign policy. As a result, many actions that should be prosecuted as treasonous, such as inviting the heads of terrorist states to speak at universities — are not subject to any kind of legal action. However, my question would be how “enemies” should be defined, given a proper foreign policy. Clearly, the category would include any states with which we’re at war. As Hanah notes, people or groups attempting to wage war from within (or without) are also properly considered “enemies.” Beyond that, I could only see that the term should apply to states that a reasonable person would understand to be committed to overthrowing the US government. For various reasons, it might not be worth waging war on such states — perhaps they’re so poor as to be unable to inflict damage and/or our military is occupied with a serious threat elsewhere. Nonetheless, it would be treason to assist their efforts.
Thoughts?
The “Objectivist Roundup” is a weekly blog carnival for Objectivists. Contributors must be Objectivists, but posts on any topic are welcome. The Secular Foxhole hosted this week’s Objectivist Roundup. Go take a peek!
Also, I’ll be selecting the questions to answer on my next Rationally Selfish Webcast later tonight, so please take a look and vote on those that you’d most like me to answer. Also, I’ve not gotten too many new questions for the webcast lately, so if you’ve got one rolling around your head, please do submit it!
For Tuesday’s episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, I posted a podcast on “Jenn Casey and Kelly Elmore on Effective Communication at SnowCon 2012.” That podcast is now available for streaming or downloading.
Remember, you can automatically download podcasts of Philosophy in Action Radio by subscribing to Philosophy in Action’s Podcast RSS Feed:
This is the preview for the SnowCon 2012 talk by Jenn Casey and Kelly Elmore on “Effective Communication: How Objectivists Can Use Positive Discipline Tools in Their Adult Relationships.” Information on future SnowCons can be found here.
Listen or Download:
Topics:
Links:
The mission of Philosophy in Action is to spread rational principles for real life… far and wide. That’s why the vast majority of my work is available to anyone, free of charge. I love doing the radio show, but each episode requires an investment of time, effort, and money to produce. So if you enjoy and value that work of mine, please contribute to the tip jar. I suggest $5 per episode or $20 per month, but any amount is appreciated. In return, contributors can request that I answer questions from the queue pronto, and regular contributors enjoy free access to premium content and other goodies.
Philosophy in Action Radio focuses on the application of rational principles to the challenges of real life. It broadcasts live on most Sunday mornings and many Thursday evenings over the internet. For information on upcoming shows, visit the Episodes on Tap. For podcasts of past shows, visit the Show Archives.
On Sunday’s episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, Greg Perkins and I answered questions on helpful criticism of others, evolutionary psychology, cheating on work questionnaires, cheating on taxes, government secrets, bribing government officials, and more. The podcast of that episode is now available for streaming or downloading.
You can automatically download podcasts of Philosophy in Action Radio by subscribing to Philosophy in Action’s Podcast RSS Feed:
Listen or Download:
- Duration: 1:00:31
- Download: Enhanced M4A File (22.0 MB)
- Download: Standard MP3 File (20.8 MB)
The mission of Philosophy in Action is to spread rational principles for real life… far and wide. That’s why the vast majority of my work is available to anyone, free of charge. I love doing the radio show, but each episode requires an investment of time, effort, and money to produce. So if you enjoy and value that work of mine, please contribute to the tip jar. I suggest $5 per episode or $20 per month, but any amount is appreciated. In return, contributors can request that I answer questions from the queue pronto, and regular contributors enjoy free access to premium content and other goodies.
You can download or listen to my answers to individual questions from this episode below.
My News of the Week: Let’s get started!
Question: How can I criticize someone’s work without hurting their feelings? In student theater circles, I struggle to be honest when asked what I thought of an actor’s performance, or a director’s job, or the writer’s work. The writing can be very bad and the performances pretty flat too. My first instinct is to latch onto anything positive I can in the play, and to just talk about that. However, then I seem to be someone afraid to offer criticism to someone’s face, and I’d hate to criticize behind their back. So how can I be critical in a helpful and friendly way?My Answer, In Brief: Constructive criticism is a skill that can be developed and practiced. Toastmasters is a great way to do that.
Listen or Download:
- Start Time: 4:29
- Duration: 9:18
- Download: MP3 Segment
- Tags: Communication, Conflict, Emotions, Etiquette, Relationships
To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.
Question: What is your opinion of evolutionary psychology? For example, a recent study claims that there is a gene for being a political liberal. Or another claim is that studies show that women are “hypergamous” in that they are “wired” to seek out the most “socially dominant” men that they can find in the “sexual market”. What is your opinion on all this?My Answer, In Brief: Evolutionary Psychology seeks to explain human psychology and behavior as the product of evolutionary adaptation. It’s just the latest fad in determinism, and often depends on very sloppy science.
Listen or Download:
- Start Time: 13:48
- Duration: 10:45
- Download: MP3 Segment
- Tags: Evolution, Free Will, Psychology, Science, Sex
Links:
- Why Is Sex Fun by Jared Diamond
To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.
Question: Is it wrong to cheat on a work-style questionnaire on a job application? I’ve been denied certain jobs because I’ve answered too selfishly on job questionnaires that gauge a person’s work style. The questions often ask what you would do in certain situations, if you prefer working alone or with others, etc. Is it wrong to answer falsely on those tests for a job you want and know you can do well?My Answer, In Brief: Pretending to be something other than you are to prospective employers – whether in skills, experience, or personality – is neither moral nor practical. However, you can speak up when you think that you’ve been unfairly judged by such tests.
Listen or Download:
- Start Time: 24:34
- Duration: 7:01
- Download: MP3 Segment
- Tags: Business, Ethics, Honesty
Links:
- Viable Values by Tara Smith
To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.
Question: Is it immoral to cheat on your taxes? It’s essentially a lie to protect the products of your labor. So is it wrong just because it’s illegal?My Answer, In Brief: While it’s perfectly moral to evade taxes in today’s system of massive governmental theft, the penalties are so harsh that it’s surely unwise to do so.
Listen or Download:
- Start Time: 31:35
- Duration: 11:56
- Download: MP3 Segment
- Tags: Ethics, Government, Honesty, Law, Rights, Taxes
To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.
Question: Should private citizens be legally obliged to keep government secrets? Should it be a crime for private citizens to divulge “top secret” information? That is, if I have no specific security agreement or contract with the government to keep information confidential if I come to possess it through no fault of my own? What if lives are at stake?My Answer, In Brief: Every person should care deeply about his government’s capacity to effectively protect rights, including against foreign aggressors. Hence, the choice to publish government secrets should focus on whether doing so will help protect rights or undermine them.
Listen or Download:
- Start Time: 43:31
- Duration: 8:22
- Download: MP3 Segment
- Tags: Foreign Policy, Government, Law, Rights, Secrets
To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.
Question: Is it immoral to bribe a government official? There are many approvals and licenses that are required to be taken by individual and/or companies for doing anything. But they are not granted unless you bribe the concerned government official. (They are not ashamed of asking you directly.) In that case, is it immoral on your part to bribe them as you have no way out?My Answer, In Brief: When faced with the double injustice of government licensing, then a demand for a bribe, it’s perfectly moral to use the cheapest, easiest, and/or safest method of circumventing that rights violation.
Listen or Download:
- Start Time: 51:53
- Duration: 7:25
- Download: MP3 Segment
- Tags: Corruption, Ethics, Government, Regulations, Rights
To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.
Be sure to check out the topics scheduled for upcoming episodes! Don’t forget to submit and vote on questions for future episodes too!
Philosophy in Action Radio focuses on the application of rational principles to the challenges of real life. It broadcasts live on most Sunday mornings and many Thursday evenings over the internet. For information on upcoming shows, visit the Episodes on Tap. For podcasts of past shows, visit the Show Archives.
For anyone wishing to ask a question, make a observation, or share a link with NoodleFood readers, I hereby open up the comments on this post to any respectable topic. As always, please refrain from posting inappropriate comments such as personal attacks, pornographic material, copyrighted material, and commercial solicitations.
SnowCon 2011 — Front Range Objectivism’s weekend conference in mid-March in Denver (and Breckenridge) — will be upon us sooner than you think!
To attend SnowCon, you must register and pay by noon on Thursday, March 3rd. That’s just nine days away. (GACK!) If you want to take advantage of the $20 off for registering sooner rather than later, you must register by noon on Thursday, February 24th. That’s two days from now!
To find out more about SnowCon’s events and pricing, visit its web site: SnowCon 2011.
