Right to any belief is not survivable.

Rights and responsibilities

[ 21/November/21 ]

The “About” section, rights without responsibilities I cannot support.

Hi all, I just read the about section, and to be able to read it I had to tick a box saying that I agreed with it – which was a bit weird.

I generally align with what it says, except for one bit:

“We support people’s rights to hold whatever views and beliefs they wish.”

I’m not sure I can entirely align with that.

Any right claimed, without an appropriate level of responsibility, is necessarily destructive.

If one looks at any complex system, from a systems perspective, then it will have sets of boundary conditions required to allow that form of complexity to exist. At higher levels of awareness, one of those boundary conditions is the notion of responsibility, of being as aware as reasonably possible of the results of actions on others and on the systems that support us all, and not doing anything that poses an unreasonable level of risk to anyone.

It seems beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt that reality (whatever it actually is) is sufficiently complex and uncertain that all such determinations will have levels of uncertainty involved in them (hence the test of reasonableness in context), and none of that absolves us from the requirement of making such determinations (to the best of our limited and fallible abilities).

So I can support the right to hold “whatever views and beliefs they wish” only in so far as that right is accompanied by a responsibility to take all reasonable actions to protect the lives and liberties (responsibly expressed) of all others.

Any right, without an appropriate responsibility, must necessarily, eventually, lead to the destruction of entire system that gave rise to the systemic structure that allowed for the possibility of that “right” in the first instance.

The evolution of complex systems is an extremely complex topic, and it does seem to be the case that every new level of complexity is in fact founded on, and reliant upon, a new level of cooperation; and every new level of cooperation is vulnerable to exploitation by “cheating” strategies, thus requiring the emergence and evolution of an “ecosystem” of “cheat detection and mitigation” systems, if it is to survive long term. We humans are deeply complex systems, with multiple levels of such systems. And I have spent over 50 years playing in the depths of that particular rabbit hole, starting from ethical and biochemical perspectives, then moving to strategic and logical and systems perspectives, and the step from binary logic to the infinite class of non-binary logics was an “interesting” one.

So nothing “simple” here, other than the absolute necessity for all rights to have a contextually appropriate level of responsibility.

About Ted Howard NZ

Seems like I might be a cancer survivor. Thinking about the systemic incentives within the world we find ourselves in, and how we might adjust them to provide an environment that supports everyone (no exceptions) with reasonable security, tools, resources and degrees of freedom, and reasonable examples of the natural environment; and that is going to demand responsibility from all of us - see www.tedhowardnz.com/money
This entry was posted in Ideas, Our Future, Philosophy, understanding and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comment and critique welcome

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s