Replying to Avatar mark tyler

Let’s imagine that example is really how it plays out

Universe 1: everyone lets that person A walk around as he pleases, and *everyone dies but 1% of the population* as a result of only that person’s freedom.

Universe 2: that person is forced to follow x procedure, *everyone* lives.

Would you choose universe 1 or 2?

And maybe to put a finer point on it, would you consider shooting person A if they credibly told you they would definitely do something that might spread this specific disease to you?

I’m just hoping to establish the relatively easy case we agree at least on choosing universe 2. And I’m curious what you think about the hypothetical “finer point”.
Avatar
alanajoy 2y ago

I would legitimately rather die than lose autonomy over my body to any authority. I trust my own intelligence, no one will ever force me to do something against my best judgement.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Leo Fernevak 2y ago

💯 And with our extensive record of how central planning works from observing decades of communism, there is nothing as deadly and dangerous to humanity as central planning.

Our survival a species depends on decentralization, self sovereignty, bodily autonomy, individual rights and the right to property.

Avatar
mark tyler 2y ago

Yeah, I concede that my hypothetical is unlikely. If you’ve read the book Artemis, their anarchic society probably would send person A out of an airlock without a space suit. I dunno I’m 100% for freedom and the non-aggression principle, but what I’m getting at here is trying to figure out what a consensus is on who started the aggression.