3 ms·
Playing devil's advocate here, but why don't we? It's not the worst idea anyone has ever hand. I sort of think epistemological pollution is an externality of b
by jknoepfler 10y ago
Playing devil's advocate here, but why don't we? It's not the worst idea anyone has ever hand.
I sort of think epistemological pollution is an externality of being stupid/gullible that we should make people liable for.
Laziness is pretty difficult to operationalize, but if you were literally too lazy to feed your children that would be a form of criminal negligence. So we do, to an extent, already do this.
- freshhawk 10y agoWhy don't we? Because thankfully some people understand how power works. Especially the power to imprison people for subjective qualities. Depending on who's judging, this comment could get you in some legal trouble if those laws existed. Flawed people adjudicate and enforce laws. Because they are people. Forgetting that is dangerous.
- jknoepfler 10y agoWe already do this very liberally in the United States judicial system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negligence. This has nothing to do with power, and everything to do with a setting minimum legal bar for due diligence below which an individual can be held accountable in a court of law.