= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Eugine_Nier comments on The noncentral fallacy - the worst argument in the world? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (1742)
Because there's an ethical injunction against it.
You may want to look at this post.
Given a general case, you should be able to argue about harms. Injunctions only come into play where you have some reason to rationalize a bad conclusion in an unusual-seeming case. As no society has so far collapsed due to lack of injunction against taxes, an injunction against all non-consensual-things-taking is unnecessary.
The point is that while rationalizing the conclusion doesn't seem bad from the inside.
This is very much debatable. If you look at actual collapsing societies throughout history, a large part of the problem is taxes strangling the economy.