LISTENER

Tim cooper

  • 5
  • reviews
  • 0
  • helpful votes
  • 15
  • ratings

Entertaining and informative

Overall
5 out of 5 stars
Performance
5 out of 5 stars
Story
5 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 2021-07-12

The performance by our dearest reader of Dear Reader is excellent. His ordered stylized speech really helps in bringing you along the journey through the history of the founding to near present day North Korea.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

So sad it’s now over.

Overall
5 out of 5 stars
Performance
5 out of 5 stars
Story
5 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 2021-04-30

A number of times I found myself brought to tears, not necessarily by the given passage, but just from the remembrance that though I’m hearing his voice the man is gone. Never to speak another word again.

Thank you for sharing your story Christopher, I feel like I know you a little better.

You are certainly missed

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

Articulate, well reasoned and thought-provoking!

Overall
5 out of 5 stars
Performance
5 out of 5 stars
Story
5 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 2021-01-15

David Friedman is as clear and concise a thinker as I have encountered.

The book being Narrated by David is also wonderful. With his full understanding of the work no sentences are lost in the misunderstanding/inaccurate emphasis of the reader.

The audio-quality leaves something to be desired, as David is clearly recording it from his home office or another room that is not quite soundproof. However the trade off of audio-quality for the qualitative understanding of this complex work is well worth the trade.

David's argument's come from primarily a consequentialist/utilitarian/pragmatic stand point instead of a moral one. This lends David to having a dispassionate, refined articulate manner in which he presents his ideas. One that may be more persuasive to those who may not accept or have thought through the non-aggression principle.

David is also ready and willing to acknowledge any weaknesses that are present in his argumentation, and where he does not believe we yet have an adequate solution, he states as much clearly, and when able to, explains the why as well.

David is not willing to hide the ball, and isn't attempting a conversion or awakening to Libertarian's ideals. He is positing a system that should be desirable to most if not all, even if they are not necessarily Libertarian's in their politics. To understand how and why, one must read the book.

The book was thoroughly understandable, but having spent many years within as well as thinking deeply about Libertarian philosophy, I cannot be sure whether or not someone new to the material would be able to absorb the entirety of the manuscript. I however would still recommend the book, and if you are a Libertarian, you are doing yourself a disservice by not reading it!

Thank you David for your carefully considered thoughts on these complex/challenging questions.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

Honesty of motivation

Overall
5 out of 5 stars
Performance
5 out of 5 stars
Story
5 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 2020-12-11

Understanding of the violent nature of the state, while not acknowledging the violence inherent in the destruction of private property.

Emma would know one owns oneself, but the fails to realize that this one also owns the products of their labour.

Property is an extension of ones self.

Through a the application of our faculties against the world in its state of nature, we create something new which was created by you, using your faculties and is thus an extension of your ownership of yourself to the things you create.

The application of the violence of the state however in both the definition and the enforcement of those property rights, does not then follow to be just or correct.

If I killed a fish. And there are 2 of us. You do not have an equal claim to that fish. If you were to take that fish, a primal instinct would emerge within me to stop you. This is because our property is necessary to our survival. The act of you taking the fish, may not be physical violence against my body, but it is an attack on my ability to survive. Perhaps I consumed all my energy in the acquisition or said fish. You taking that fish, will directly result in at least pain, and possibly death. The fish is mine. Should I share the fish? Probably, both morally and logically. But where the fish goes, is my choice. To deprive me of that choice, is an act off violence.

Lovely short listen however, A rich perspective. I will probably listen to it again. Recommend.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

Thoughtful and thorough from Thiel

Overall
5 out of 5 stars
Performance
5 out of 5 stars
Story
5 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 2020-10-31

A great book.

Lots of valuable applicable knowledge as well as a fountain or different insights.
Thoughtful looks at what could come, along with what has happened in our recent past.

Peter through his experience, analysis and.instincts also offers different ideas/principles to consider when orienting yourself towards accomplishing a meaningful goal.

Great listen, Blake does well, would have been great to have heard this in Peter’s voice however.


Many of the ideas in the first few chapters Peter has articulated in many different forums on the book, as well as other events. So you can hear parts from peters own perspective, however the later chapters are not commonly discussed in those forums and offer a deeper look at Peter’s own philosophy on life.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!