Scientists, Engineers, and Software folk tend to understand better propertariani

Scientists, Engineers, and Software folk tend to understand better propertarianism because they have been analytically framed – they have trained themselves to divorce subjective and moral value from truth propositions.

The problem with literary and philosophical (and continental especially) readers is that they have trained themselves to preserve subjective or moral value to reason.

Given that most philosophy (other than logic, law, and science) consists of fantasy moral literature (secular theology) as either a form of escapism, or means of rallying against the status quo (power), this subjective(personal) and moral (interpersonal) framing is understandable.

The truth is we live under scientists, jurists, philosophers, and theologians. And the competition between them serves the distribution of abilities at the cost of competition over decidability (truth), when the only difference philosophy and theology can provide is choice of the preferable and the good – not decidability. Hence why I think the law must be inviolate so that choice of preference and good is not conflated with the decidability of truth, and such that false arguments can no longer be made.

Why? Because false arguments to the preferable and the good (and the true for that matter) are just acts of fraud to escape voluntary exchange or obtain exchange at an unwarranted discount.