Oddbean new post about login | logout You presuppose everyone wants to have a peaceful society _and_ you presuppose that everyone should necessarily be forced to agree with everyone else. The only societies you can have that respects everyone's individual self-determination are entirely voluntary ones. The standards are set by the members (through self determination) and those who don't agree to the standards are invited to Exit to another society that fits them (or start their own). You either consent fully (including trade-offs that you consent to) or you're being coerced. I abhor coercion.
I'm not convinced that there is any such thing as a wholly voluntary society. If one wanted to leave society altogether, where would one go?
I more or less fully agree with this: nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzquqjyy5zww7uq7hehemjt7juf0q0c9rgv6lv8r2yxcxuf0rvcx9eqythwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnwdaehgu3wvfskuep0qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uqzpngdpvsyxn3z74fq0k929u0cu0hrc97ycrsvsa0tlj3x76lndge028wj33
Oh, gotcha! My one quibble, then, is that I don't think even subsidiary societies are entirely voluntary. We can't choose where we are born, or to whom, or in what socioeconomic conditions, yet those have a dramatic influence on our development and our relationships within society. Subsidiarity helps people choose what is best for them in matters of shared concern, but I don't think we can escape the fact that there *are* always matters of shared concern. No man is an island.
humans, and many other species of all kinds, down to the smallest, exploit the principle of vires in numeris freedom is not an absolute, it really is literally "axes of freedom" as in engineering freedom is on a scale from completely involuntary, to completely unpredictable and unhinged the very expression "unhinged" itself hints at the semantics of the word freedom, in that something that is without any bindings is dangerous the central problem with this and one that makes intelligence also a liability in broader society is that the less degrees of freedom you can comprehend, the more likely you are to support a politician campaigning to reduce the degrees of freedom in the society this plays a part in the discussions of things like drug and sexual subject matter as well, in fact, you can almost say that "left" and "right" are defined by their standpoints on this, but that polarity can be easily flipped around to support the current thing and the established authority that's why the political leanings graph is important and why the mainstream doesn't want it to become widely acknowledged - they depend on being able to flip everything around at that boundary