Dialogues and Critiques
of the Fundamental
Viewpoints of Others
Aids Adequate and Correct Understanding

We, Paul and Kitty Antonik Wakfer, have seen in our interactions with many others who are self-acknowledged proponents of a free society, that the thoughts and ideas which they express are often without adequate or even correct understanding of the principles which must underlay any stably ordered, maximally free, minimally restrictive society. In the summer of 2003, at the time when the Self-Sovereign Individual Project was in its earliest stages, Paul decided that it might be advantageous to obtain some critical appraisal of his ideas by a libertarian thinker. Having read and admired the writings of George H. Smith and finding that he was available for contract services, a paid written critical exchange was arranged with his for the purpose of obtaining logical analysis of the philosophical basis of the Self-Sovereign Individual Project. This is the first item presented below. (In December 2004, we found that the link to subpages of "The Philosophe", the website of George H. Smith, no longer worked. Worse than just that, the URL for the home page is currently being redirected to a pornographic site; the new owners gained control in August of that year. The links provided are all to the Internet Archive version of George's website last crawled on February 16, 2004.)

In addition, in order to see how our currently completed ideas concerning the optimal basis for a free society compare with those of other libertarian scholars, Paul has undertaken the task of critiquing the writings of any such living scholars that he finds online. This is done not with any view to denigrate them, but to see if our own solutions to the creation of a stable ordered, maximally free, minimally restrictive society are adequate, and to see how any problems which other scholars raise can be solved by our system. The section will also therefore include examples taken from the published writings of George H. Smith. They will be placed here so that readers might better understand how our ideas differ from those of George Smith, and to illustrate our ideas by contrast with those of his. By this means we hope to help readers learn essential principles and analysis techniques, just as we hope that these critiques will help both George Smith and us to more solidly found and strengthen our ideas concerning the philosophy underlying liberty. These critiques have been sent to George Smith by email and it is our hope that they will be accepted by him in the constructive spirit in which they have been written. George Smith has also been informed that if he does not agree with Paul's critiques, then he may name the forum on which to respond and Paul will join in the discussion. Any response that he makes will together with Paul's reply be added to this portion of the website.

• Exchange with Paul on George's Critique (paid for by us) of Early Project Writings.
1. Initial Email Exchange Establishing the Paid Contract Critique by George
2. George's Critique of Paul's Critique of the US Declaration of Independence
3. Initial Comments on the Declaration of Individual Independence (DOII)
4. Exchange re Whether George has done Sufficient Analysis and his Agreement to do More
5. Substantive Comments on the Annotated DOII as it was in Early September 2003
6. More Substantive Comments on the Annotated DOII
7. Concluding General Comments on the Annotated DOII
8. Critique of Paul's Views on Rights as Described in this early Annotated DOII

Comments, Questions
and Suggestions

We welcome all constructive comments regarding the examples above at MoreLife Yahoo. Paul and Kitty will make comments on posts submitted concerning arguing from the correct principles. Readers are encouraged to learn from the critiques of the writing of libertarian scholars in these sections that they too should not merely nod their heads in agreement when reading even the works of highly published libertarian authors, but should always address each work with critical appraisal. Understanding concepts also requires the ability to explain them to others so that they too understand. Whether or not the "listener" chooses to agree on the correctness of the "new" ideas expressed in the critiques of this section is up to him, but it may reveal much about his willingness to abandon the old inadequate but comfortable, for the new correct but sometimes radically different.