Is it that libertarianism can or must be defended for the consequences it will bring about? Since this issue was at the center of the discussion which took place among the speakers and commentators in our symposium I dwelled on this subject first. As the result ‘open consequentialism’ was supported, in which truth and falsehood of an ideology, such as libertarianism, is to depend upon unarticulated and numerous consequences that people will experience within the society committed to it. The reasons why one has come to believe or to abandon an ideology differ from one to another. Some general view point, descriptive or normative, can be said to be true if and only if there are always new examples to be discovered for its truth.
In the rest of the comment some other points raised in the conference were briefly summarized; distinction between economic and personal freedom, nature of meta-utopia, policy for spontaneity, insights and limits of economics, redistribution and national defense, and the roll of brave individuals in a libertarian society.