WHY IS NATURAL LAW A LAW OF NATURE?
(A well intentioned person conducts a conventional argument giving us an opportunity to educate common people)
—“”[what] inescapable law of the natural law[?'” You have a penchant for manufacturing spooks. Where is this so called “natural law”? I have looked everywhere, I have observed my surroundings and I have not located it.”— Gyeff Strife
Then, unfortunately, you observe poorly. 😉
—“Imagine the following: I have a friend. I ask him to turn around. I have deceptively acquired his trust, therefore he turns around. At this opportunity, I stab my friend in the back. We are only friends in the mind of the now deceased, who was a dullard. In my mind he was a competitor. Now tell me, will a divine bolt of lightning come and strike me where I stand? If no such lightning occurs then your “natural law” is an illusion. … You may say I’ve broken your natural law in spite of no lightning, yet I am walking about a free man (now with one fewer competitor), of what consequence is breaking or not breaking the natural law? … You may say that your collection of dogmatists will come and duel me and they will win due to a numbers advantage. But, I ask, what logic was used to convince the first dogmatist of the existence of “natural law”, in the absence of a dogmatist collective? … There is circular logic: The law exists because there are enforcers of the law; there are enforcers of the law because the law exists.”— Gyeff Strife
If you try to violate the physical law of gravity by wishing you can fly, and jumping from a height, you will pay the price for it. If you violate the natural law of reciprocity within an in-group by earning trust, and harming one with whom you have engaged in a reciprocal exchange of non-imposition of costs we call ‘trust’, then if you violate that natural law of reciprocity (a) if the person whom you stab lives, he will retaliate, and likely retaliate using altruistic punishment meaning he will escalate to even greater punishment (retaliation) in order to preserve the group value of reciprocity; and certain the group with whom you have exchanged the promise of reciprocity for membership, will also punish you. In fact if you try, you will have a very hard time trying to discover (a) any violation of rational (reasonable) choice (bounded rationality), and (b) any violation of reciprocity. this is because it is a violation of the laws of nature: parasitism is intolerable for a life form, just as cooperation if possible, is an intolerable loss for a life form.
The DIfference: The physical universe is deterministic and doesn’t have memory, potential to multi-forecast, and choice among forecasts. Humans have memory and choice, so that there is a time delay to human reaction in the natural law of man, that there is not in physical laws of nature. That does not mean that man is any different from nature. It means only that the same forces are delayed such that we can chose to capture the highest returns on energy we can imagine, rather than the first available that we cannot avoid capturing – wich is nature’s limitation we have overcome.
—” … you have a penchant for manufacturing spooks.”— Gyeff Strife
I have a penchant for avoiding ‘making words up’ in the continental model, and for prohibiting abrahamic sophism, pseudo-moralism, pseudoscience and supernaturalism by using disambiguation, serialization, and operationalization of existing terms instead. In this case the long history of Aristotle’s, the Church’s, and the Scientific Enlightenment term ‘Natural Law” – meaning necessary law whose violation is harmful (via-negativa) and whose observation is beneficial (via positiva) “living in harmony with nature” just like, in reductio, if we try to violate the law of gravity it will be harmful.
This natural law is in evidence by every test available to man including the history of legal dispute resolution throughout all of recorded human history; the evolutionary necessity the natural law due to the laws of nature (physics), and due to the evidence of recorded human moral intuitions, recorded human retaliations, and our inability to circumvent it in subjective testing regardless of example.
So just as all human action is rational (reasonable) within the limits of bounded rationality, and physical demands, so is the natural law of reciprocity is universal, and we can find NO examples otherwise – including any pretense of the existence of altruism. Reciprocity: productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer of demonstrated interests, demonstrated by action or inaction, free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests, demonstrated by action or inaction, of others of one’s group also engaged in reciprocity with the actor.
Ergo, as in this example, I have a penchant for testimonial truth in which I have used disambiguation, serialization, and operationalization, to disambiguate and define terms such that they function as systems of measurement at maximum humanly possible precision given our current knowledge, and no ‘analogies’ enable ‘putting one’s finger on the scale’ to lie (as did Boas, Marx, freud, cantor, adorno et all, derrida et al, rothbard et all, feminists et all, neocons et al – the second attempt at destruction of the cooperation between the classes by the use of abrahamic deceit to generate envy, using the false promise that any other political and economic organization is possible or superior in results for all.
—“You say that there is no “we”, however, this sentiment appears to me to be inauthentic because simultaneously you mention “crimes against humanity”, “human life”, and “human civilization”. Of what consequence is the plight of humanity to “me”. If all of humanity becomes extinct a single moment after my death, am I impacted in any way? Furthermore, you suggest that the spreading of ignorance is a negative, however, if my competitor wallows in ignorance, is he not easier to exploit by me?”— Gyeff Strife
It is hard to teach people disambiguation serialization operationalization and competitive falsification, leaving only the best truth candidates surviving, because it’s more expensive than justification, which is the easiest and most primitive means of human reasoning – wayfinding. Because wayfinding is a pre-rational process of the lower cortical religions. And so we do it by intuition.
The fact that you are ignorant of the long history of the natural law, ignorant of the long history of the law, apparently ignorant of mathematics, and logic; ignorant of the techniques by which lies are created; and likely ignorant of the continuous pattern of transformations between the fundamental, the quantum, the particle, the element, the molecule, the organic molecule, the protein all the way up to sentience, consciousness, reason, and calculation is rather obvious – because you read literature (fantasy) rather than science.
You don’t know my place in intellectual history, nor do you yet have a sense of the movement I and others have created, but I am, and we are, the reformation of the natural law, upon which western law depends, that has evolved to prosecute the crimes of the marxists, feminists, and postmodernists, in their attempt to violate the natural law of reciprocity, by the second attempt at the destruction of western civilization, the first time with judaism to undermine, christianity to weaken, and islam to conquer, using false promise, baitingin into moral hazard, profiting from hazard, and hiding under the cover of moral pretense, in order to reverse evolution and restore us to dysgenic, egalitarian, maternal, poverty of the herd, prior to the indo european invention of eugenic, hierarchical, meritocratic, pathernal, wealth.