| Individualism in ethics asserts that every individual man gets a certain sphere of autonomy, within which he can do what he pleases. Every man’s sphere is different, but they are still ethically equal, because, if the ethic is formulated properly, the spheres are constructed under rules that treat them equally. | 倫理では個人主義が人々に勝手に自律する領域をあたる主張でござる。倫理が正確に考案されたら、領域が個々に違えど行動者として無差別な法律で製作された領域だから各人が匹敵する。 |
| Unlike socialism, which we might describe as an end point that we don’t know the path to, individualism is more of a beginning point that we chart a path from. Every man has a will of his own, and the right to exercise that will – but the ethic needs to prevent conflict between rights. Rights cannot conflict. One man’s right to control a resource – say, an apple – precludes everybody else from controlling that apple. If another man also had the right to control it, then a conflict in control rights occurs if the two don’t agree on how to use it. What is the right allocation? | 終着点へのたどり道を知らない主張である社会主義と違って、個人主義が分かった始点からの道を作る主張でござる。各人には自分の意思があることと、その意思を行使する権利を持つ。だが、倫理の理論が対立を防がなきゃならない。権利と権利の対立がありえない。人が資源を制度する権利を持つなら、その権利がその人以外の人々に制度する権利を否定する。他者にもその権利があったら、使用に同意がないと権利と権利の矛盾になる。どっちが正しいか、誰も判断できない。 |
| I say this frequently, but the purpose of ethics is to differentiate between right and wrong action. Where an ethic fails to make that differentiation, it fails as an ethic. A conflict of “rights” within an ethic is therefore a sign of a failing ethic, at least so far as the scope of that conflict extends. | 拙者がよく言うが、倫理学の目的が正しい行動と正しくない行動を区別することでござる。その区別のできない倫理は倫理としての失格でござる。故に倫理での「正しいことの矛盾」は矛盾の周囲では倫理の失敗の印でござる。 |
| So the question to begin with is, how can we derive rights to control things, i.e., property rights, in such a way that those rights never conflict? | 問題は、どうやって例外なく矛盾しない世界のものを制御する権利、いわゆる所有権、を作り出す？ |
| Basically, the solution to this is to start property rights for each man centered on himself, acknowledging their right to expand those property rights outward (through the ethical framework of homesteading) until they reach another’s property, at which his right to expand stops. In this way, everything starts out unowned, but can become owned, and through every step of the process, there is no conflict of rights. | 基本的に、問題の解決は各人の権利を個人自身から生み出し、ホームステッドの理論で世界に広げる権利を認めて、拡大化を止める他人の所有まで。これで、世界の全てが無主で始めるが、所有になれる。その通り、最初の一歩から全世界の所有化まで権利の矛盾がない。 |
Individualism in Ethics
Bookmark the permalink.