Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

it's the type of reasoning "when I do it, it's effects are moral, so if everyone does it, it's effects will be moral too"

That would seem to be a reasonable assumption if the morality of individual action is to be justified. After all, isn't the Golden Rule based on the opposite inference - that one should not behave as one wouldn't like everyone else to?

Expand full comment
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

I can't see how their actions could be economically harmful or immoral. As for the issue raised by Eliezer, it's a matter of defining a standard for "informed consent", not an inherent problem with libertariamism.

It's not the actual specifics of how these people behave that's relevant here - it's the type of reasoning "when I do it, it's effects are moral, so if everyone does it, it's effects will be moral too" (this may be the case, but this reasoning doesn't show it). If an environmentalist doesn't impose his will on others, but still thinks that the world would be so much better it everyone followed his example, because it's better when HE does it then there is a definite bias. Ditto for some libertarians and others with the same reasoning. Whether they act on the bias or not is seperate.

Expand full comment
13 more comments...

No posts