PROPERTARIANISM AND SATISFACTION IN MORAL ARGUMENT
It is appealing to seek feelings of satisfaction by criticizing the morality of one’s opponents; or the rejection of others’ criticism of one’s opinions on moral grounds.
In propertarianism, we avoid almost all the various emotional distraction, loading, framing, overloading and consequential entanglements by identifying the various forms of property that are affected the described actions, and determine whether voluntary or involuntary transfer is being advocated (or caused), and whether such transfers are truthfully or untruthfully articulated. In this way we make clear arguments in economic terms that are free of loading and framing. But we do not escape the moral conclusion. Because, in the end, if you are a thief or a liar, we call you a thief and a liar. But we do it on logical, internally consistent, and unavoidable grounds.
Religious argument in the form of scriptural decree; it’s reformation into Moral argument as rationalism; and its reformation into pseudoscientific argument as psychologizing; are all forms of deception perpetrated through the use of analogy, loading, framing, overloading, and suggestion, in an attempt to abuse our cognitive and moral biases, by largely guilting and shaming us into justifying one form of parasitism or another: involuntary transfer.
Propertarianism replaces pseudoscientific psychologizing, moral rationalism, and religious scripturalism, with a single universal test, and a single universal operation. That single test being that the only moral action is the fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer of property-en-toto, and the single operation of voluntary exchange.
Propertarianism is a language for the logical analysis of the content of moral statements. In propertarianism all moral statements are commensurable. And and all moral questions are decidable.
Source date (UTC): 2015-04-10 16:09:00 UTC
Leave a Reply