From: Richard Steven Hack (richardhack@pcmagic.net)
Date: Fri Mar 08 2002 - 10:35:37 MST
At 07:41 AM 3/8/02 -0500, you wrote:
>Simply, If you say "don't coerce" then you can't coerce people into
>following that rule!
>
Ah, that does not follow. Self-defense is not coercion. It IS force, but
coercion in this context has the implication of "initiated in violation of
reason".
>For a longer explanation, "don't coerce" applies to the person who might do
>the coersion. A "right" applies to the person who might be coerced. This
>is not just a semantic issue, but an actual distinction that has
>ramifications.
>
>If you make "don't coerce" a rule, then the remedy is to penalize whomever
>is coercing. If you make a "right" then the remedy is to restore the right
>to the person it was taken away from, and maybe award damages for losing
>that right.
Well, yes, and the point of the penalization is to increase the economic
cost to the coercer. However, moralists translate this simple point into
"punishment", and all sorts of emotional reactions which are irrelevant.
How a society organizes its reaction to coercion is based on its cultural
evolution and environmental and economic factors. I'm talking strictly
about the logic.
>Along that vein, imagine a zookeeper who lets his lions out into the city
>instead of feeding them. You can't punish the lions for "coercing", because
>animals are not subject to human laws. You can't punish the zookeeper
>because he isn't coercing anything. On the other hand, by making a "right
>to live", you CAN punish the zookeeper for taking actions that logically
>would result in interfering with other people's "right to live".
True. But the issue here is, is the zoo keeper malicious or just
stupid. If stupid, you shouldn't "punish" him. Only if he is malicious is
it justified to cause HIM harm to prevent him from doing what he's doing.
You see how quickly the notion of "right and wrong" and "punishment" gets
out of hand? You're ready to "punish" someone for mere ignorance or
stupidity... (Actually, I have no problem with that in many cases on a
personal level, but on a social level that is bad practice.)
Richard Steven Hack
richardhack@pcmagic.net
--- Outgoing e-mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.332 / Virus Database: 186 - Release Date: 3/6/02
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:12:51 MST