(FB 1548260937 Timestamp)
“PROPERTARIANISM” –> “CRITICAL NATURALISM”?
—-“Would you consider renaming Propertarianism to “Critical Naturalism”?”— Kash
That’s Very Smart. I Never thought of that.
That would change it from a legal category of name to a philosophical category of name.
Well it’s true right? In philosophical terms it would be categorized as “critical naturalism”.
Although, what is the difference between the law and critical naturalism?
I ‘m not sure there is any.
So why are critical naturalism and the law of tort not identical?
I mean, that’s my underlying argument: that the west differs from the rest because across the ages of political-philosophical-religious propaganda, the law of “sovereignty, reciprocity, truth, and duty” remained constant.
So I would call the Law a discipline that relies on critical naturalism. I would call propertarianism the natural law that relies on critical naturalism.
So yes. I think the brand name has stuck, but yes I’d (a) accept that as a truthful description of the philosophical category (b) use the term myself as a philosophical category, (c) maintain the position that the law is the only complete and parsimonious category, and that the attempt to produce science is a long term attempt to unify western law (our civilizational cult) with western philosophy (middle class propaganda).