= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Roxton comments on The Fallacy of Gray - 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 (78)
That which I cannot eliminate may be well worth reducing.
I wish this basically obvious point was more widely appreciated. I've participated in dozens of conversations which go like this:
Me: "Government is based on the principle of coercive violence. Coercive violence is bad. Therefore government is bad." Person: "Yeah, but we can't get rid of government, because we need it for roads, police, etc." Me: " $%&*@#!! Of course we can't get rid of it entirely, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth reducing!"
Great post. I encourage you to expand on the idea of the Quantitative Way as applied to areas such as self improvement and everyday life.
Doesn't "coercive violence is bad" beg the question in a way that would only be deemed natural if one were implicitly invoking the noncentral fallacy?
No, many people think coercion qua coercion is wrong - for example, philosophers of a Kantian bent, which is very common in political philosophy.
Point taken, but I would advance the view that the popularity of such a categorical point stems from the fallacy. It seems to be the backbone that makes deontological ethics intuitive.
In any event, it's still clearly an instance of begging the question.
But my goal was to cast a shadow on the off-topic point, not to derail the thread.
I'm not sure it is; that government involves coercion is a substantive premise.
Unfortunately, people who agree with the off-topic point can hardly accept such behaviour without response.
Many libertarians think that. I'm not so sure about that. I don't think he would have wished "no criminals should be captured" or "Everyone should dodge taxes" to be the Universal Law.
I'm not referring to Kant, I mean contemporary philosophers, like Michael Blake, who is not a libertarian.