Message from @NativeInterface
Discord ID: 476169370926841885
but so we have an impasse
so, if one side wants to press, we have conflict
who is the aggressor?
well i agree in one sense
the person who laid claim to the dead person's house? or the one who is from out of town claiming its theirs? arbitration failed., either side could agree on a judge.
i believe that if there is a challenge or an impasse, people will always strive to solve the issues in one way or another
but i dont believe that people will just run into an impasse, and there will be a giant hole in the system, and people will just sit on their hands and do nothing
no, either they give up, or they press.
it reminds me of the who would build the roads argument
so, what happens if they press
who is the aggressor?
i believe that there are peaceful solutions to impasses
only if both sides agree to peace, in which case arbitration would have worked or settled
but one side didn't budge
both think they have rightful claim
so, who is the aggressor if one side presses
the out of towner with a story, or the guy who moved into a dead persons house.
can't really prove the out of towner is lying
i don't know
can't really prove he isn't the owner
its perfectly fine to admit you don't know, its a rough question. with, perhaps, no right answer.
do you think ownership is objective?
hmm
maybe ownership is objective, but "rightful ownership" is subjective
good distinction. I was more curious about rightful ownership. Since i think most people can believe current ownership is objective in terms of whoever can defend something currently owns it.
so, rightful ownership is subjective
that, in my opinion, is what makes the previous question about who is the aggressor so hard.
reality is hard, thats why we consult professionals
because to be an aggressor, you'd need to be in the wrong. If both sides believe the other does not have rightful ownership, then either is the aggressor and both is the aggressor.
agreed, this is usually why we go to a third party
but it doesn't always work, and this subjectivity is why
yeah, no system is perfect. good enough is usually good enough
good is good enough until it doesn't fit you.
life would be easier without humans
lol whats that? anarcho primitivism?
but anyway, so would you say your private property is something you "rightfully" have ownership of?
yeah i believe i rightfully have ownership to it because i acquired it peacefully
acquired it, or keep maintaining it peacefully
i mean, just moving into a dead persons house could be considered peaceful. doesn't make it yours unless you keep it through peaceful means
well if someone else had a morally higher claim and you fended them off through force, it wasnt very peaceful