lacertilian at gmail.com
Sun Feb 7 05:54:47 UTC 2010
The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com>:
> Philosophically nolipsism bears some resemblance to Buddhism which is fine from a spiritual point of view. E.g. why fear death when there is no "me" to die, etc. Being an attorney however, I am sure you are aware of the legal can of worms nolipsism opens up. Human rights are tied to identity. If "I" don't exist, then stealing my stuff or even murdering me is a victimless crime. Doesn't make for a happy outcome in my opinion, especially for libertarians. Probably why the authors back-pedalled from their claims in the conclusion.
Hi, my name is Spencer Campbell, I will be your Stefano Vaj for tonight.
Are victimless crimes morally, ethically, and legally acceptable? They
ARE crimes, so, no to the last one. The first two are arguable. I feel
confident that a coherent system of law could be made without the
assumption that any selves exist for it to protect. It would
essentially treat people as highly valuable property, no different
from houses or cars, owned by entities just as imaginary as
Really it could only streamline everything. We should do this. We
should do this right now.
More information about the extropy-chat