Re: Foundation for law
 

Alas, I was not born knowing all the answers to all the questions of the world. I guess I'm happy for that on second thought.

Re: Foundation for law
 

ok, despite your fatuous remark, let's make a start. do you understand the concept of "possible worlds"? this is, in critical thinking, what models are to those in the engineering and related fields. make a "possible world" out of your planet and maybe we might get a hint of what you are on about. also , the parrying, a question for a question etc. might be a good device for litigators. in spculative thought it is mainly an evasion. i gave you something besides a question, what have you for us..............b

Re: Foundation for law
 

[ QUOTE ]
One fundamental rule should be that laws should be designed to punish those who hurt others.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a better fundamental rule would be that laws should minimize the harm done.

ex. There are 3 people left on the island, you, B, and C. B and you are close and get along famously. B hates C and kills C. punish B? why?

Re: Foundation for law
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A rapist heaven.

[/ QUOTE ]

How so? Is not rape the "theft" of someone else's autonomy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't killing the theft of someone's life?

Re: Foundation for law
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please, if you can, avoid mindless thinking like "x is bad because it's wrong".
...
I will go first. One fundamental rule should be that laws should be designed to punish those who hurt others.

[/ QUOTE ]

Define "hurt".

I think the purpose of the laws should be to maximize the happiness of the society. Hopefully the people on the island are nice, and like other people to be happy -- that will allow the rules to be minimal, and the happiness maximized. Otherwise, there will be a lot of rules, and everyone will suffer for it.

The minimal rule for me would be: act compassionately.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're required by law to act compassionately? This sounds like the worst basis for a legal system of all time.

Re: Foundation for law
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A rapist heaven.

[/ QUOTE ]

How so? Is not rape the "theft" of someone else's autonomy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't killing the theft of someone's life?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. So essentially:

Don't Steal.

That's all you need. Which just makes it bleedingly obvious that all rights are property rights.

Re: Foundation for law
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A rapist heaven.

[/ QUOTE ]

How so? Is not rape the "theft" of someone else's autonomy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't killing the theft of someone's life?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. So essentially:

Don't Steal.

That's all you need. Which just makes it bleedingly obvious that all rights are property rights.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

Re: Foundation for law
 

[ QUOTE ]
You're required by law to act compassionately? This sounds like the worst basis for a legal system of all time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm an idealist. Like I said, that would maximize happiness, if people liked other people to be happy. But, there are some jerks out there that get their kicks by hurting other people. So, more rules... and more suffering.

Re: Foundation for law
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One fundamental rule should be that laws should be designed to punish those who hurt others.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a better fundamental rule would be that laws should minimize the harm done.

ex. There are 3 people left on the island, you, B, and C. B and you are close and get along famously. B hates C and kills C. punish B? why?

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes much more sense than my initial suggestion.

Re: Foundation for law
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A rapist heaven.

[/ QUOTE ]

How so? Is not rape the "theft" of someone else's autonomy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't killing the theft of someone's life?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but I thought it would sound more credible if I had two.