Hey okay, so I'm finding the materials available here a little overwhelming...
I have a question that will help me understand the deontological approach to ethics. In this viewpoint, how would an agent make a decision where 1) inaction would cause harm, and 2) all available actions would cause harm? Harm being taken to mean restricting or removing individual liberties. One could come up with all kinds of practical examples of this, it happens all the time.
I can see where a consequentialist approach would be to mitigate harm by sort of spreading it around, or maybe picking a scapegoat, right? This would justify taking the initiative and voluntarily causing some sort of harm. But if I understand this correctly it seems to put the sovereignty of one entity above another...which sounds utterly against the whole concept of libertarianism.
Can someone point me in the direction of an author, book, or other resource that deals with this? I've skipped through my copy of the Ethics of Liberty without finding a section that seems to answer my question, and I'm not at all practiced in reading philosophy. I have a feeling this is a dumb question but as I say, I'm just trying to define my terms. Help!
I'm not a big ethics guy, but how can inaction on your part cause a restriction of liberty?
Not helping is different from harming.
The keyboard is mightier than the gun.
Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.
Voluntaryism Forum
Well, for example when it would result in the restriction of MY liberty. Or a loved one. Or speaking in a broader sense, of a group which has contracted with me for protection or something...
I avoided being specific because specific questions usually get specific answers, which isn't what I'm looking for. There must be a general rule involved here. But hey, here's a specific example.
I've received a death threat. Turn myself in to these people who wish me harm, or they do violence against my whole family. I know that their issue with me is personal; they won't continue to pursue my family once they have me in custody. My family asks me to protect them. I have a number of choices, but I make harm inevitable no matter how I play it.
So one option would make me the scapegoat for the group. Another would make the group the scapegoat for me. Others would be to try some type of violence or get a third party involved, risking myself and the family in the process.
What I've read would help me assign moral responsibility to the people making the threat. But it doesn't help me decide what to do. Even when I'm the victim of force I still need to determine an ethical direction, in spite of knowing that it's ultimately "not my doing" or whatever.
Autolykos, I'd like to know how you arrive at this, logically. Also, what bearing does it have on the question? I'm not following.
Autolykos:Not helping is different from harming.
Not according to a lot of people. In fact I'd say that may be one of the main roots of the tree of disagreement.
Lady Saiga:I've received a death threat. Turn myself in to these people who wish me harm, or they do violence against my whole family. I know that their issue with me is personal; they won't continue to pursue my family once they have me in custody. My family asks me to protect them. I have a number of choices, but I make harm inevitable no matter how I play it.
No you don't. First off, nothing is inevitable. Second, they would be the ones making harm, not you. But it sounds like you already know this, given:
Lady Saiga:What I've read would help me assign moral responsibility to the people making the threat. But it doesn't help me decide what to do. Even when I'm the victim of force I still need to determine an ethical direction, in spite of knowing that it's ultimately "not my doing" or whatever.
I take it you're including other categories besides "causing harm" in your definition of "ethics"?
Lady Saiga:Autolykos, I'd like to know how you arrive at this, logically. Also, what bearing does it have on the question? I'm not following.
It sounded to me like you believed that not helping is the same as harming. For example, a drowning person would presumably die if you refuse to help him, but that doesn't mean you pushed him into the water to begin with. So it's a matter of (human) causality.
John James:Not according to a lot of people. In fact I'd say that may be one of the main roots of the tree of disagreement.
I know, and I agree.
Retin-a Micro Tretinoin Gel Use - Retin-a and red acne scars
Click Here To Enter
Retin-a Micro Tretinoin Gel Use!!!
Whiteheads, Skin Health, Blackheads, Acne
retin-a pregnancy
Buy Tretinoin online
How to treat Blackheads
acne scars and retin-a
How to treat Acne
acne medication retin-a
retin-a micro acne scars
retin-a adult acne
Buy Retin-A online
Ordering Aberela online
renova vs retin-a micro
retin-a for acne insurance
retin-a tretinoin
retin-a 0.05 tretinoin cream
minoxidil acid retin-a
retin-a and red acne scars
tretinoin retin-a
ortho neutrogena retin-a cream .1
retin-a tretinoin cream 0.025
retin-a and cancer
retin-a makes acne scars worse
difference between tretinoin cream and retin-a
retin-a and acne
renova retin-a cream 0.025 20gm tube
tretinoin gel retin-a micro for wrinkles
retin-a and doxycycline results
retin-a and acne scars
retin-a and doxycycline
How to treat Skin Health
drug interaction with retin-a
ortho dermatological division retin-a
retin-a causes acne scars
retin-a for acne scars
retin-a micro vs retina-a tretinoin
is retin-a the same as tretinoin
renova vs retin-a
Buy Renova online
discount tretinoin retin-a
retin-a improves acne scars
retin-a for acne red marks
acne medication retin-a for wrinkles
acne scars retin-a micro
retin-a and acne and dark spots
retin-a micro tretinoin gel use
retin-a and heal red acne scar
is retin-a good for acne
post acne red marks and retin-a
retin-a and renova
Purchase Retin A
retin-a or tretinoin
Buying Retin-a
acne treatment retin-a
retin-a versus renova
retin-a micro medication
retin-a micro shallow acne scars
can retin-a micro cause impotence
will retin-a make acne scars disappear
prescription medications that contain retin-a
retin-a medication
azelaic retin-a facial eczema
acne scars retin-a
does retin-a make acne scars worse
retin-a helps with acne scars
is retin-a good for cystic acne
Buy Avita online
How to treat Whiteheads
retin-a and cystic acne
>>>>I've received a death threat. Turn myself in to these people who wish me harm, or they do violence against my whole family. I know that their issue with me is personal; they won't continue to pursue my family once they have me in custody. My family asks me to protect them. I have a number of choices, but I make harm inevitable no matter how I play it.>>>>
you live in a universe with perfect knowledge of other people's thoughts, perfect knowledge of the future, and an omnipotent evil force?
>>>>So one option would make me the scapegoat for the group. Another would make the group the scapegoat for me. Others would be to try some type of violence or get a third party involved, risking myself and the family in the process.>>>>
your family and yourself are already at risk. You lose nothing by defending yourself with violence. Non-aggressive use of violence is the moral solution. NAP win.
Ventolin Coupon : Relion ventolin hfa
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, COPD, Bronchospasm, Asthma
You asked for his logic, but I'll expand on it. If not doing anything is causing harm, then you, Lady Saiga, have caused harm to every person in Sudan who has been wrongfully killed by the sudanese rebels since the time you were able to be conscious of the murders. Not just that, but any injustice in the world where you could have in any way, shape, or form helped the person treated unjustly and did not help, then you have caused harm. Obviously, this conclusion is ridicules. By looking on your picture, it appears you are in some sort of law enforcement or military uniform. Are you either? if so, I can imagine you are placed in all sorts of circumstances where causing harm or stopping it might not be such black and white situations. As to your main question: follow the NAP. The people demanding your life are the ones in violation of the NAP. This is THE ONLY LAW; all other law may be derived from it, and it only. Because they are extorting you, you now have the right to take defensive, violent action against the party in fault.