Ektopos online dating

This page is used to test the proper operation of the Apache HTTP server after it has been installed.

If you can read this page, it means that the Apache HTTP server installed at this site is working properly.

In general, mail sent to the name "webmaster" and directed to the website's domain should reach the appropriate person.For example, if you experienced problems while visiting you should send e-mail to "[email protected]".For information on Amazon Linux AMI , please visit the Amazon AWS website.In an article entitled “Rothbard as a Philosopher” (Feser 2006) Edward Feser harshly criticises the philosophical abilities of Murray Rothbard.According to Feser, Rothbard “seems incapable of producing even a minimally respectable philosophical argument, by which I mean an argument that doesn’t commit any obvious fallacies or fail to address certain obvious objections.” (Feser 2006) He makes it clear that he is not necessarily disagreeing with Rothbard’s conclusions—rather, “the problem is just that Rothbard seems incapable of giving a philosophically interesting for his claims.” To illustrate this criticism, Feser takes what he regards as a typical piece of Rothbardian philosophical analysis, namely, Rothbard’s argument for self-ownership.

This argument is taken to be typical by Feser in three respects: 1.

it is central to Rothbard’s moral and political philosophy; 2.

it is maintained virtually unchanged by Rothbard over many years, and 3.

it is a fair example of Rothbard’s philosophical acumen.

He writes: “If Rothbard was capable of giving an interesting philosophical argument, then, we would naturally expect to find one here, and yet (as we will see) we don’t.

While I do not claim that this one example decisively establishes Rothbard’s philosophical mediocrity all by itself, I do think it provides a pretty strong indication.” (Feser 2006) In fact, it is not all that difficult to find examples of fallacious, contentious or less-than-perfectly articulated arguments in the works of philosophers who, by general consensus, are far from being mediocre.