Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'rules without rulers'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Freedomain Topics
    • General Messages
    • Current Events
    • Libertarianism, Anarchism and Economics
    • Atheism and Religion
    • Philosophy
    • Self Knowledge
    • Peaceful Parenting
    • Men's Issues, Feminism and Gender
    • Education
    • Science & Technology
    • Reviews & Recommendations
    • Miscellaneous
  • Freedomain Media Content
    • New Freedomain Content and Updates
    • General Feedback
    • Freedomain Show Lists
    • Technical Issues
  • Freedomain Listener Corner
    • Introduce Yourself!
    • Meet 'n Greet!
    • Listener Projects
    • Community Reference Information

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


AIM


Gallery URL


Blog URL


Location


Interests


Occupation

Found 1 result

  1. “Rules without rulers” is a typical anarchist rebuttal to the statist argument “there is no way anarchism could work because people are inherently bad and without government everyone would rob, rape, murder, and throw burning Molotov cocktails into store front windows”. To the “rules without rulers” argument, the statist will make some statement about “how this sounds good in principle, but in the real world there is no way to put into practice.” In other words, there is this general conception that people are generally nasty little things, and without a gun prodding their center right rib blade, they will try to get away with anything and everything. To these people, there is no concept of non-coercive mechanisms that could hold together society and keep people from “selfishly benefiting at the expense of others”. Their universe is only win lose. At this point in the conversation, I think having some good examples may help to start prying open their preconceived notions. Whatever your opinion is on tipping, I believe it one of the best examples of a rule without a ruler. In the U.S., through social normalization and general human good will, tipping 15-20 percent is considered part of the cost of dining out [1]. This is a substantial cost added to your experience, is completely voluntarily, and 99.5% of customers are reported to tip their waiter [2]. The Waitbutwhy.com article that this statistic comes from also says “If you don’t tip [waiters] you’re.... The worst” and goes onto say “Even if service sucks, never go below 15%...” This implies tipping is not even a bonus for good service, but a mandatory, not forced, part of the exchange. Furthermore, if tipping were to become a forced part of the dining experience, not tipping would be equivalent to shoplifting. Currently in the U.S., 9% of people are reported to shoplift per year [3]. This shows that an enforced rule, with the threat of the loss of freedom, fines, and a criminal record is more likely to be broken than one that is completely voluntarily and is only enforced by social normalization/ostracization. If anyone has any thoughts on this, or other examples of how “Rules without Rulers” is already being practice, it would be greatly appreciated. Even though I am usually not a pragmatist, I think being able to provide practical examples of ways anarchy is already working in society is useful in breaking through someone’s preconceived notions. Most people will never be convinced, but we are here, and as they say “the more the merrier”. http://www.tripadvisor.com http://waitbutwhy.com/2014/04/everything-dont-know-tipping.html. http://www.shopliftingprevention.org/whatnaspoffers/nrc/publiceducstats.htm
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.