MORE NON-AGGRESSION FALLACY SUPPRESSION —-“1. Against someone who initiates ag

MORE NON-AGGRESSION FALLACY SUPPRESSION

—-“1. Against someone who initiates aggression.”—-

(libertarian fallacy by suggestion)

It’s like saying the sky is blue. Aggress is a verb. like “act”. Its meaningless unless you define the noun that functions as the predicate: the scope of what we tolerate retaliation against aggressions against.

The fact that so many people are suckers for this rhetorical fallacy says volumes about human cognitive bias. Aggression = Bad, non Aggression=Good, but only if you are in kindergarten.

The problem of ethics lies in determining what empirically causes people to retaliate no matter what we agree to, what normative contracts we invest in, and what commons we invest in, and of those three categories, what transgressions they will insure by formal punishment, formal restitution, formal penalty, informal boycott or disassociation, informal shaming, or interpersonal shaming.

Another strange cognitive bias is the common impulse that the subject matter (conflict resolution) that has empirically driven the evolution of the common law of torts for over two thousand years; is the origin of philosophical reason in the ancient world, rationalism in the medieval, empiricism in the modern, and science of late, should somehow be a matter of personal introspection by the common folk rather than empirical science by masters of the craft.

In other words, why does the average person feel capable of issuing pronouncements on ethics any more than structural engineering, the structure of space time, protein folding or algebraic geometry?

Yet we know the reason: because we are not trying to discover the truth when we speak of ethics. We did not evolve to tell the truth, or science would not have taken us over two thousand years to develop. Instead, our genes are telling us to negotiate, influence, and lie on their behalf. And we are faithful servants of their influences.

Man is a rational animal. He is not moral or immoral but moral or immoral when it suits him. And his definition of ‘moral’ is whatever suits his reproductive strategy at the moment. This is why genders and classes, nations, tribes and races all state that moral truths favor their genetic advancement over the genetic advancement of others.