Great question William: Here is the correct answer straight out of our AI. You c

Great question William:
Here is the correct answer straight out of our AI. You can access the AI at:
https://
chatgpt.com/g/g-682681bf9f
54819180437bac589ed838-curt-doolittle-s-natural-law
…. .

Yes, the Natural Law Institute (NLI) under Curt Doolittle explicitly defines “parasite” and “parasitism” in operational legal and moral terms.

According to Volume IV of The Natural Law, parasitism is any imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others without reciprocal compensation. More precisely:

“All attempts to circumvent reciprocity constitute an attempt at free riding, parasitism, or predation – whether by accident, error, bias, or intent – are irreciprocal, and criminal, unethical, immoral, or evil.”

This definition is grounded in the Natural Law of Reciprocity: one must not, by display, word, or deed, impose or allow the imposition of costs on others’ demonstrated interests unless it is part of a productive, fully informed, warrantied, and voluntary exchange.

In economic and legal dimensions, Doolittle extends this to any form of rent-seeking, free-riding, or fraud—actions that generate gains for one party at unconsented cost to others. This includes both direct harm (e.g., theft) and indirect externalities (e.g., misinformation, fraud, or legal imposition without due diligence or consent).

Thus, in NLI’s legal philosophy, “parasite” is not a rhetorical insult but a strictly defined class of irreciprocal behavior testable under the logic of sovereignty, reciprocity, and demonstrated interest.