3 ms·
> Because the purpose of regulation is not simply “stop people from doing things I don’t like.” Of course it is. What does regulation do if not prevent an unde
by johnday 5y ago
> Because the purpose of regulation is not simply “stop people from doing things I don’t like.”
Of course it is. What does regulation do if not prevent an undesirable class of actions?
- rcoveson 5y agoYou're not disagreeing, or the way you think you are disagreeing doesn't fit the original statement. Your exchange is analogous to this one: A: A square is not simply "a quadrilateral whose every angle is 90 degrees." B: Of course it is. What is a square if not a four-sided figure with all right angles?
- johnday 5y agoIt's a fair point, I should have been more precise in my response. What I meant to say was, "what does regulation do, other than prevent an undesirable class of actions?"
- rcoveson 5y agoI think, like with the square, the question is: "What are the characteristics that make the set of actions which should be prevented by regulation narrower than the set of all undesirable actions." We know there are a huge number of undesirable actions which we don't think should be regulated. Some of them are minor things, like petty insults or inconsequential dishonesty. Others are major, but are protected by other ideals. For example, choosing to spend a million dollars on gold to bury in a private crypt. Those are some examples that come to mind when I hear that the purpose of regulation is not simply to prevent undesirable actions. It's not that regulation does things other than that. It's that it must have some other attributes in addition to that. Determining those attributes is what makes it not simple.