Topics

1

The Philosophy of Freedom/Libertarianism/Doctrine of free will / Moral Theory of Non-aggression

« on: June 19, 2016, 12:48:23 AM »

Hello there. Libertarianism is a movement based on an ideological principle, namely the Non-aggression Principle (NAP). I decided that the NAP could be expanded from a moral principle into a full-fledged moral theory in order to make it more robust and less ambiguous. Maybe it's not necessary, but I think it does help to break the NAP down into more direct, simple components. I'd like to show you all what I've come up with and ask for your opinions. And I would also like to hear your thoughts on defining property from the perspective of moral philosophy.

Non-aggression Principle: It is immoral to initiate force upon a person without consent.


Moral Theory of Non-aggression

An action is morally wrong if:

• it is the initial violence or threat of violence upon a person
• it obstructs without consent a peaceful individual's capacity to use their property as they see fit
• it facilitates, enables, or causes a non-consensual exchange of value
• it exerts greater than the minimum required force to provide adequate defense

The Moral Theory of Non-aggression (MTNA) only describes what is morally wrong to do. That is to say that if an action may be described by MTNA, it is immoral, and all other actions, which cannot be described by MTNA, are either permissible or morally right. MTNA assumes impartiality so that no person is implicitly better or worse than others, and each person’s interests weigh equally. I wish to stress that MTNA does not prescribe any obligatory actions which must be committed for this is not its purpose. Essentially, MTNA only describes immorality and does not define what is morally right, nor does it make any attempt.

Thanks for any suggestions or criticisms.