My Slight Discomfort With Theft

[acabobie]

My roommate told me about this.. Last night someone who I consider to be an acquaintance and possible friend broke the law. He was with a group of other teenagers looking for booze and they ended up at a store and many stole liqueur. The police came and arrested many people, including him on the suspicion of stealing alcohol. It turned out that he only stole a sandwich, so he spent three hours in jail and was released and has a future court date.

 

This wasn't the first time that he has committed theft. My roommate who is his friend told me of his other exploits. Amongst them was wearing baggy pants into Walmart and waiting for the "coast to be clear" to cross into the Walmart bathroom with alcohol and then tape the booze to the inside of the pant leggings and walk out of the store undetected. Deposit the loot into their vehicle and then go and go back and do that as many times as desired. I asked my roommate his age; 18, and if he would buy the alcohol rather than resorting to theft if he could legally. My roommate said that he would, and that gave me a sense of okayness about the ordeal. (Drugs shouldn't be illegal anyways, this kind of thought.)

 

The sandwich is a different story, it is not illegal to buy sandwiches at any age and he also had enough money on him to make a purchase.

 

My roommate is also a thief, he steals traffic cones and then takes the remaining ones and spaces them evenly. He currently has two cones in our room that he is using as decoration, and I admit it looks rad. 

 

I find that these do not bother me as much as it maybe should. Same with kleptocracy, our government farmers taking the fruits of our labors. That does not bother me as much as my government murdering people overseas, especially the signature drone strikes in Pakistan, resulting in the deaths of children who have nothing to do with terrorism. 

 

I think that my tolerance for theft is one of the reasons I am not fully on board with anarchy. 

 

I have some questions that I wish for people commenting bellow to answer:

 

1. Is theft a lesser of the three evils? (murder, rape, and theft)

2. What are some arguments other than UPB that find theft disagreeable?

3. Can a thief make a good friend, would you be friends with someone who you know steals?

  

[dsayers]

I asked my roommate his age; 18, and if he would buy the alcohol rather than resorting to theft if he could legally. My roommate said that he would, and that gave me a sense of okayness about the ordeal. (Drugs shouldn't be illegal anyways, this kind of thought.)

 

It is true that the voluntary trade of drugs is not immoral. However, it is not true that person A can take/make use of the property of person B under ANY circumstances other than consent of person B (or understood consent, which is another discussion not germane to this one). Regardless of whether the State threatens to agress against person A for having alcohol, and regardless of whether person B acquiesces to this threat, the alcohol in question belongs to person B. For person A to take it is theft and therefore immoral.

 

As for your ending questions, theft is morally identical to assault, rape, and murder in that they are all immoral. What does lesser evil mean? Something is either evil or it is not. The amount of damage done by theft might be less than that of assault, rape, and murder, but it might be a lot more. The only thing that sets theft apart from assault, rape, and murder is that theft is the only immoral act where restitution is easily quantifiable. Whereas even assault as minor as a punch in the face could send an air bubble to the brain or allow infection to penetrate the bloodstream potentially leading to permanent, irreversible damage.

 

I am curious as to why you would choose to co-habitate with somebody who would keep a thief as a friend?

[ProfessionalTeabagger]

Would YOU ever want to be stolen from? If the answer is no then logically you must apple the same standard to everyone else.

[JamesP]

Given that you describe this thug as an acquaintance/possible friend, all you're really telling us is that you have no standards.

[acabobie]

As for your ending questions, theft is morally identical to assault, rape, and murder in that they are all immoral. What does lesser evil mean? Something is either evil or it is not. The amount of damage done by theft might be less than that of assault, rape, and murder, but it might be a lot more. The only thing that sets theft apart from assault, rape, and murder is that theft is the only immoral act where restitution is easily quantifiable. Whereas even assault as minor as a punch in the face could send an air bubble to the brain or allow infection to penetrate the bloodstream potentially leading to permanent, irreversible damage.

 

I am curious as to why you would choose to co-habitate with somebody who would keep a thief as a friend?

In the legal system, there are gradations of punishments for various crimes. A petty theft of say, a five dollar sandwich is treated as a misdemeanor, whereas a theft of a twenty thousand dollar car is treated as a felony. So there is an idea in society, and myself that some things are worse than others. Another example; A murder with prior premeditated intent to kill is viewed worse than say an accident. 

 

Why the roommate I have: 

We were assigned together by the university, I like to play video games with him, he shares, we get along well, and it is a good experience with him overall. 

 

 

Would YOU ever want to be stolen from? If the answer is no then logically you must apple the same standard to everyone else.

I have been stolen from before. My bike last year was stolen, and walking by the bike rack from where it was stolen everyday after work brought sorrow, and tears almost began to roll down my cheeks a couple different times. Thankfully I was able to locate and recover my bike.

 

 

Given that you describe this thug as an acquaintance/possible friend, all you're really telling us is that you have no standards.

Perhaps... I wear clothes in public, so I have a standard of modesty. I get homework finished on time so I have a standard of that, whatever that standard is called. Other standards as well.

 

However, I do not think you are talking about standards in that way. I think the standard you speak of are ones of how I choose who to be in my social circles? I would not hang out with people known to rape or murder. I did however have a Ukrainian coworker over the summer that expressed the want to murder Russians, blacks, and Jews.. He was very nationalistic and racist. It did concern and disturb me, but I did not leave the job. 

[dsayers]

Why the roommate I have: 

We were assigned together by the university, I like to play video games with him, he shares, we get along well, and it is a good experience with him overall. 

 

How does learning of this theft and how close it comes to your own property effect you view of the situation? If it were me, I'd be moving my property in with people I trust while I make every effort for a re-assignment. Given the person was caught and charged, this should be easy enough to effect.

 

Also, bringing up the legal system does nothing to clarify your inquiry since the legal system is subjective and made up. When the legal system is involved, they steal from the alleged assailant and pocket the money. None of it goes towards the victim (if there even is a victim; most things they action have no victim), so it's irrational to think their involvement has anything to do with addressing evil.

[acabobie]

How does learning of this theft and how close it comes to your own property effect you view of the situation? If it were me, I'd be moving my property in with people I trust while I make every effort for a re-assignment. Given the person was caught and charged, this should be easy enough to effect.

 

Also, bringing up the legal system does nothing to clarify your inquiry since the legal system is subjective and made up. When the legal system is involved, they steal from the alleged assailant and pocket the money. None of it goes towards the victim (if there even is a victim; most things they action have no victim), so it's irrational to think their involvement has anything to do with addressing evil.

My roommate and the person who was caught and charged are two different people. Well that is you, and with my life I have a two year contract to live in the dorms, that if I would break would cost, and there is no one in my life that I intimately in relationship with, and thus there is no one I trust to any high degree. The people I do trust more than others, either go to a different college or are quite a bit older than myself. 

 

Any abstract concept is made up. And just because something is made up, doesn't mean it should be so easily dismissed. Math was made up, but the ideas are true and testable. So in your view: Murder=Rape=Theft=Evil. They are all evil and none of them is a higher tier of evil? They are equally immoral? 

[dsayers]

It's not like something can be 5 immoral while something else is 3 immoral. Every behavior is either moral, immoral, or amoral (lacking a moral component). I noticed that you're not at all focusing on the lack of consent involved in the theft of the alcohol. Is there a reason why you need for theft to be justifiable?

 

So if your roommate or his friend or a family member or whomever used your home to say rape you, you would just say, "Gee, I wish I didn't have two years left on my contract?"

[JamesP]

Perhaps... I wear clothes in public, so I have a standard of modesty. I get homework finished on time so I have a standard of that, whatever that standard is called. Other standards as well.However, I do not think you are talking about standards in that way. I think the standard you speak of are ones of how I choose who to be in my social circles? I would not hang out with people known to rape or murder. I did however have a Ukrainian coworker over the summer that expressed the want to murder Russians, blacks, and Jews.. He was very nationalistic and racist. It did concern and disturb me, but I did not leave the job.

I meant that you have no standards when it comes to the people you consider your friends. Or, at the very least, these standards aren't remotely philosophical. We become the people we surround ourselves with. If we surround ourselves with petty thugs, they will approve of such behaviors. If we surround ourselves with good people, they will call us on our bullshit and approve of good behavior. We cannot expect to remain untainted for long in close proximity to negative influences.

[nathanm]

I think you can have 5 immoral vs. 3 immoral.  But it probably doesn't matter in the end.  Moral vs. immoral behavior is binary, after which there are gradations, but there is a solid line which is crossed or not crossed.  For example, circumcising a baby boy is immoral, but it is less immoral than gunning down a crowd of people. No matter what minor wrong thing you compare with a massively wrong thing, neither of them can ever be good.  Shoplifting a pack of gum is immoral, holding a gun to a clerk's head and demanding cash is more immoral.  The line is objective, but perhaps the gradations are subjective.

 

I had a friend who shoplifted a cassette tape from a record store once, and another one got busted for embezzling 3 grand or so from her employer.  I gave the first guy a lot of hell for it, but none of my circle of friends had much to do with the embezzler after that.  They were both wrong, but there were different degrees of severity.  Again, the specifics of the crime does not change the moral status of the behavior.

[dsayers]

@nathanm: I understand everything you're saying. At the risk of sounding obtuse, I must ask: how do you know? If we agree that moral status is binary (where a moral component is present), then wouldn't the grade be referring to the level of damage? Perhaps in turn, the level of willingness of the assailant to do damage? I'm not sure why people ascribe this to analog morality when that could easily be written off as a common misnomer. It's like when people say brutal truth. We know what they mean, but they are stating it incorrectly.

 

Why is this important? Just look at this thread. Look at the gum thief. Some people are generally confused enough to think that a small transgression is justifiable simply because it's not large. I think we do them a greater service not by indulging the delusion that morality is analog, but to help them understand property rights and that the internal inconsistency of immoral behavior is an objective truth. These types of people openly support seriously heinous things that are present in our society because they think of it in terms of lesser evil, greater good, necessary evil, and other irrational conclusions.

[nathanm]

Fair warning, this isn't going to sound very good when I explain it, but I want to keep it brief.  You know because of the UPB test thing. Can it be universalized?  Is it a winwin situation?  Can two people do it to each other simultaneously?  A man cannot steal gum from a shopowner, because if he did it would mean that the shopowner gave him the gum, but he doesn't, he expects something in exchange.  So to take the gum without paying is wrong.  The thief wins and the owner loses. 

 

But I admit that the strict binary thing can cause issues too.  Like this unfortunate crap with certain toob videos and the letters a, c, m and d.  (I hate even bringing it up) Folks think they've got FDR over a barrel with that and I can see their point, (probably not equivalent, but I felt very wrong about taking unemployment money when I got laid off because I wanted to be as strict as possible in regards to morality)  but it's like in the light of all the other statist evils in the world it really doesn't matter one bit.  People are being blown apart in Syria as I write this, cops are harassing and beating people up, children are being abused…a misstep into statist territory over some internet trolls is infinitesimal.

 

Perhaps another test of immorality is that the perpetrators of these behaviors make every attempt to hide it.  The thief runs away from the store owner, he does not walk in and start taking things out the door with a big smile on his face.  The abusive parent won't hit their child in public, but they will behind closed doors.

[acabobie]

First of all, apologies for not posting in the past week, I had exams and much homework.

 

 

It's not like something can be 5 immoral while something else is 3 immoral. Every behavior is either moral, immoral, or amoral (lacking a moral component). I noticed that you're not at all focusing on the lack of consent involved in the theft of the alcohol. Is there a reason why you need for theft to be justifiable?

 

So if your roommate or his friend or a family member or whomever used your home to say rape you, you would just say, "Gee, I wish I didn't have two years left on my contract?"

 

The lack of consent thing is a good question, it is perhaps a vestige of non-philosophical thought. No one in particular within a Walmart store owns the product, the entity known as the corporation does, this depersonalizes the incident and makes it somehow less unacceptable to me. I don't have a personal need for theft to be justifiable, I have not stolen. I know from listening to Stefan Molyneux, that he has stolen in the past because he was hungry. If what you are saying is true about different evil things being equally evil, at the point Stefan took something, he was equally evil as a mass murderer. Because you are here on the boards, and I assume that you are a listener to the show, that you think that Stefan is of upstanding moral character. Is there a balance of good and evil? Stefan has done evil in the past according to UPB and now he is not considered an evil person, is there redemption?

 

To take an extreme hypothetical- if person A steals 5 candy bars on 5 occasions, and gives to charity 25 times, or if  person B commits 5 murders and somehow gets away with it and goes on to be a lifeguard that rescues 25 people from drowning throughout his career? Does A=B in terms of morality, and would the person be moral, immoral, or amoral? If everything is equally immoral, 5 murders=5 candy bars stolen?

 

"So if your roommate or his friend or a family member or whomever used your home to say rape you, you would just say, "Gee, I wish I didn't have two years left on my contract?""

 

This topic is my slight discomfort with theft, not my slight discomfort with having a dick up my ass. 

Whoever is giving me negative ratings, can you please say that you have and why. I would appreciate the feedback, whether it is that I am not being respectful enough, or you disagree with what I say, or whatever.

[dsayers]

Santa Claus doesn't exist. There isn't some balance sheet somewhere that says you can steal a bottle of booze so long as you put in an hour at your local soup kitchen.

 

Bottles of booze do not occur in nature. As such, it's very existence is proof that it belongs to SOMEBODY. The infrastructure of Walmart is of no concern to me. The person in question knows that the owner of the bottle is not him, so to take it is theft and therefore immoral.

 

I don't understand your comparative questions. I've already rejected the premise the moral/immoral/amoral is analog and accepted that damage done by immoral acts is analog. It's additionally confusing because putting in an hour at the local soup kitchen for example, while nice, does nothing to compensate the victim of the theft of the bottle of booze. They are isolated behaviors.

 

Also, you did not answer my question about proximity to immorality taking a back seat to a contract that has no stipulation of abiding immoral (and illegal) behaviors. You don't seem the least bit concerned that a thief could be invited into your home without your consent or knowledge.

[acabobie]

Is someone who has done an evil, an evil person forever, no matter what?

[Ace]

UPB is a system for assessing whether or not a certain action is universally preferable behavior, not universally preferable behavior, or of no moral content.  It's not a system for calculating the relative severity of different ethical and unethical actions and then tallying up on the balance whether a person is good or bad based on what they've done.

 

Think of it in terms of actions, not people.  A person can have performed evil actions in the past, be doing so presently, etc. but there's no measure for saying hey this guy is evil forever or was evil and then he stopped being evil.  Your actions either are or aren't.

 

There's nobody keeping track of everyone's morality.  That's really for you to live with and other people will see in your character.  If you want to perform unethical actions you can do what you want you just have to accept the consequences.  Think of it empirically.  We're not religious people and God is going to decide whether on the balance you were a good or bad person or whether you have achieved redemption for actions in the past.  We can have a sense for these kind of things, but there's no finite and empirical method for determining that kind of stuff - like whether you're evil forever, or which actions you can redeem yourself for and which you can't.

[Blackfish64]

When you steal, you get caught and you go to jail, or someone beats the crap out of you or maybe shoots you.  Your friends will get caught stealing eventually.  Hopefully no one will get hurt in the process.  Hopefully, it won't be a car or something big that will land them in jail for a long time and ruin the rest of their lives.  Hopefully you won't be in the house or in the car when they get caught and get charged right along with them.  

 

When you steal you hurt yourself.  It's the same with murder and rape.  Whatever you do to others, you do to yourself.  

 

If you enjoy hurting yourself and watching those around you hurt themselves and watching those they steal from get hurt, then, by all means, keep on the way you are.  If not, I would look for some new friends and some new activities to get myself into.  All of this rambunctious behavior is at best a lot of foolery and a complete waste of time.  

 

Oh, and when you and/or your friends go to jail and get locked up with the other guys in the jail, rape and murder and theft is the norm.  Your friends just might like it there, after all, who knows?