(FB 1545088319 Timestamp)
A GEM BY BILL
—“That’s what “Law” means “Decidable” in scientific language, and which means “Absolute” in archaic moral language. … That’s what Laws of Nature (unconscious, deterministic) and Natural Law (conscious, volitionary) mean: they are DESCRIPTIVE. You cannot violate the laws of nature but you can manipulate them. You can violate the natural laws, and pay the consequences. The natural world already calculates its optimum, and we ‘cheat’ it. The natural law is something else men cheat. However, the optimum method of human evolution is the elimination of cheating (parasitism). If you eliminate all parasitism you end up with natural law. If you do not then you don’t.”—Curt Doolittle
—“Don’t you still need a justification that’s more than “it’s natural” to avoid justifying your law on a naturalistic fallacy? The justification for propertarianism seems to be a utilitarian argument.”—Hue Whitman
Answer by Bill Joslin:
The Naturalistic fallacy relates to equating a positive moral standing for an action due to it being natural (“if it happens in nature it’s therefore good”) not a utilitarian stance which provides an operational description of how the action results in immoral consequences (“under these conditions and incentives, human conflict rises”). Two different domains of argumentation, the former justificatory, the later warranty.