Groups keyboard shortcuts have been updated
Dismiss
See shortcuts

Consent and beings other than smart, sane, human adults

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Stephen vJ

unread,
Jul 28, 2024, 1:05:14 AM7/28/24
to indivi...@googlegroups.com
I hardly ever start a new topic. In fact this might be my first... here goes...

All of philosophy comes down to one question: what is the best possible way to live ? I'm sure there will be debate about this statement - that's what this forum is for. Let's have it.

Through much debate and careful consideration, we appear to have concluded that the best possible life most often happens in a system where people are mostly or completely left to do as they like, limited only by the consent of others and the dictates of others with whom they have consensually contracted to dictate over them... for example, my boss can tell me what to do and often what he tells me is unpleasant, but I contracted with him to do those things in exchange for value tokens on a 3rd party database, commonly known as money and a bank. For all practical purposes I am his vassal, but with consent.

This is in opposition to a system in which people are largely dictated to wrt their behavior by others, mainly regardless of consent. Systems in which people are told what to do with their property by people they did not directly contract with appears to be particularly bad in terms of living the best possible life.

A system of consent (aka freedom or liberty) is not without restriction and compulsion, but allows for choice and options which in turn lead to better outcomes. A system of dictation by gods, emperors, ministers, elders, presidents or shamen appears to be subject to the flaws of personal choice, mass produced. Failure is replicated and repeated, options for improvement eliminated and punished. Over time this manifests in sub-optimal life.

All of this assumes consent is possible i.e. that we are talking only about action between beings capable of explicit or demonstrably implicit consent. What are we to do about the enormous portion of action which is not between like parties of this type ? What about consent between sane adult humans and children, animals, aliens, people in comas, people of limited mental capacity, etc. ?

Maybe consent is only helpful when dealing with the small part of the world which humans capable of reason. Or maybe consent can be applied universally from giraffe to crocodile, from platypus to polar bear. Or maybe we need another system for non-us beings... and then I wonder, can that system not be applied also to us ? What makes us so special that this great concept of consent works so incredibly well, but only for us, in the narrowest possible definition of "us".

Stephen.

Stephen vJ

unread,
Jul 28, 2024, 11:09:30 AM7/28/24
to indivi...@googlegroups.com
I do think this is an important and separate topic, so I'm going to copy my response on the other thread here...

I previously objected to a jury and it was pointed out to me how a judge is not much better and possibly worse... that does not mean I have been convinced of the jury solution, just that I now also don't like the judge solution. I also previously objected to the property solution, but that was long ago on another thread, so I'll raise it again here.

Imagine a whale in the open ocean. Clearly a sentient being and clearly cannot be owned. Can things be done to him without his consent ? I say no. Can his consent be gotten ? I say maybe... or maybe there is another solution. In any event, good luck getting one of his peers into a courtroom.

Now imagine a bunch of aliens landing on earth. They are slightly more intelligent than us by about as much as we are smarter than pigs. They colonize the Southern part of Africa and declare all creatures in their territory their property. Luckily we taste like Old Spice and Lux, so they just want to keep us as pets... but they also claim ownership of smaller creatures so now every jug of yoghurt and ever loaf of bread is a property dispute. Solve for X.

Stephen.

On Jul 27, 2024, at 23:05, Stephen vJ <sjaar...@gmail.com> wrote:

I hardly ever start a new topic. In fact this might be my first... here goes...

Stephen vJ

unread,
Jul 28, 2024, 11:20:45 AM7/28/24
to indivi...@googlegroups.com
One reason this topic is so important is that it is not just theoretical, but has tangible real-world implications. The ownership or stewardship idea has been applied, for example, to autistic people and in particular non-verbal autistic people. Many have been assigned a representative or assumed to be under such representation by their parents or doctors. These "owners" often see autism as an illness, something to be solved or cured or a problem to be dealt with, whereas the autistic person often likes who they are and just want to be liked and loved, like anyone else. Many autistic people have incredible skills and would prefer others to focus on those, rather than their so-called shortcomings. I say so-called, because giving speeches and shaking hands are only considered important by that loud minority called extrovert, and who is to say they're not the dysfunctional weird ones ? For decades now so-called normal people have claimed to know what is best for their autistic wards and from what I can see those wards are sick of it.

Stephen.

On Jul 28, 2024, at 09:09, Stephen vJ <sjaar...@gmail.com> wrote:

I do think this is an important and separate topic, so I'm going to copy my response on the other thread here...

Stephen vJ

unread,
Jul 29, 2024, 12:57:28 AM7/29/24
to indivi...@googlegroups.com
Picture this; Sicily 2024. Aliens from Orion land and claim the entire planet for their benevolent proto-libertarian emperor. They're in favour of democracy, property rights, NAP and the preservation of foreign cultures, hence the ban on eating yoghurt... but they're not quite libertarian. For the most part they leave us all alone, except that they see libertarianism as a mental illness or deficiency, since people who suffer from libertarianism have a hard time understanding taxes, voting and the legislative process. Trevor is on the libertarian spectrum, obviously, even though he holds some non-libertarian beliefs like juries and prime rib dinners. Dougie is on the spectrum too even though he is a minarchist and religious... he's so close to democrat that it's hard to detect that he's on the libertarian spectrum. For a while he was classified as having an entirely separate disease called Friedmanism, but eventually correctly diagnosed as being on the same spectrum as the other libertarians. Way over on the deep end of the spectrum is Stephen, Leon, Jaco and several others who are clearly incapable of grasping even the most basic principles of good taxation and government. They retch at the very word. The aliens decide that these libertarians need help - corrective education, restrictive diets, anti-libertarian medications and supervision in all things public. That way they will fit in better with the broader communities they live in. You as a libertarian have an owner / guardian who controls your income and makes sure you pay your taxes and spend nothing on pet projects like annual seminars or monthly dinner gatherings. You are regularly told to act normal, for example by voting when everyone else does. You are totally unable to get any employment due to your status, even though you would excel at many things, things that normal people hate and would be too glad to leave to you, like economics. You are not considered fully developed or sufficiently the same as others to be let loose on society unsupervised.

This is what we've done to autistic people.

If you think I'm exaggerating, look up the unemployment rate for people with Aspergers / high-functioning autism. All human beings (and possibly many animals) should be free and everyone should be able to speak for themselves. In Roman-Dutch law it is said that even the craziest man sometimes has a lucid moment, therefore a man's insanity is not in and of itself automatic grounds for annulment of a contract. I think the Romans were in many respects superior even to the cutting edge of modern legal philosophy. We can learn something from their legal system... as long as we read around the blatant sexism, of course. My point is that I do not think anyone or anything should be represented without their consent... which brings us back to the point of how best to deal with consent where it is difficult, questionable or impossible i.e. children, people in comas, sentient animals, swarms of bees, etc...

Stephen.

On Jul 28, 2024, at 09:20, Stephen vJ <sjaar...@gmail.com> wrote:

One reason this topic is so important is that it is not just theoretical, but has tangible real-world implications. The ownership or stewardship idea has been applied, for example, to autistic people and in particular non-verbal autistic people. Many have been assigned a representative or assumed to be under such representation by their parents or doctors. These "owners" often see autism as an illness, something to be solved or cured or a problem to be dealt with, whereas the autistic person often likes who they are and just want to be liked and loved, like anyone else. Many autistic people have incredible skills and would prefer others to focus on those, rather than their so-called shortcomings. I say so-called, because giving speeches and shaking hands are only considered important by that loud minority called extrovert, and who is to say they're not the dysfunctional weird ones ? For decades now so-called normal people have claimed to know what is best for their autistic wards and from what I can see those wards are sick of it.

Stephen vJ

unread,
Jul 29, 2024, 1:15:34 AM7/29/24
to indivi...@googlegroups.com
Freedom should not be conditional. Liberty should not be reserved for the nobility or men or citizens or adults or the rich or whites or any other classification you can think of. If consent is freedom and consent is conditional, then we have a problem.

Stephen.

On Jul 28, 2024, at 22:57, Stephen vJ <sjaar...@gmail.com> wrote:

Picture this; Sicily 2024. Aliens from Orion land and claim the entire planet for their benevolent proto-libertarian emperor. They're in favour of democracy, property rights, NAP and the preservation of foreign cultures, hence the ban on eating yoghurt... but they're not quite libertarian. For the most part they leave us all alone, except that they see libertarianism as a mental illness or deficiency, since people who suffer from libertarianism have a hard time understanding taxes, voting and the legislative process. Trevor is on the libertarian spectrum, obviously, even though he holds some non-libertarian beliefs like juries and prime rib dinners. Dougie is on the spectrum too even though he is a minarchist and religious... he's so close to democrat that it's hard to detect that he's on the libertarian spectrum. For a while he was classified as having an entirely separate disease called Friedmanism, but eventually correctly diagnosed as being on the same spectrum as the other libertarians. Way over on the deep end of the spectrum is Stephen, Leon, Jaco and several others who are clearly incapable of grasping even the most basic principles of good taxation and government. They retch at the very word. The aliens decide that these libertarians need help - corrective education, restrictive diets, anti-libertarian medications and supervision in all things public. That way they will fit in better with the broader communities they live in. You as a libertarian have an owner / guardian who controls your income and makes sure you pay your taxes and spend nothing on pet projects like annual seminars or monthly dinner gatherings. You are regularly told to act normal, for example by voting when everyone else does. You are totally unable to get any employment due to your status, even though you would excel at many things, things that normal people hate and would be too glad to leave to you, like economics. You are not considered fully developed or sufficiently the same as others to be let loose on society unsupervised.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages