pull down to refresh

The freedom to exercise aggression with impunity.
this is the big one, but what about the small ones? freedom to spit on the sidewalk? freedom to smoke in a restaurant? freedom to run a large diesel generator near a playground? freedom to teach my kids to be sociopaths?
reply
Pollution could be defined as a form of aggression. Smoking inside a restaurant and running a large diesel generator near a playground would fall under these.
Teaching your kids to be sociopaths is technically aggression too, because your kids aren't your property, even though you're responsible for them.
Freedom to spit on the sidewalk - your own sidewalk? sure. Someone else's? Kinda rude lol.
reply
I think it needs a better definition of aggression so we don’t fall into the trap of thinking that even words hurt. In many of these hypothetical and poorly detailed situations, it would be enough if those responsible simply avoided those environments.
As for pollution, I agree it’s an aggression when someone pollutes a water stream, harming everyone who depends on it along its path, for example.
reply
I think it needs a better definition of aggression
Okay!
As for pollution, I agree it’s an aggression when someone pollutes a water stream, harming everyone who depends on it along its path, for example.
Would the same go for polluting the air that people breathe or the land that people grow food on? If not, what's the distinction?
reply
A watercourse has a clearer path — if someone near the source pollutes it, they’re harming everyone downstream. Air pollution, on the other hand, is much smaller compared to the volume of oxygen we have. That’s how I see it, so we don’t end up labeling everything as aggression.
reply
Interesting. So what you're saying is that aggression is a function of measurability / currently perceived (and subjective) prevalence?
If in the future measurability gets better or prevalence gets worse, does the definition change?