How many centuries did it take for that simple idea to win? But yes, with fewer laws it would have been very easy to teach this one.
My guess is that society is incapable of that step. It disrupts the pretense that all the other laws are knowable and okay to enforce.
-
-
It would be like saying robotic cars can drive 10mph over speed limit. There’s an enormous game of pretend going on that can’t be admitted.
-
that's a case in which you fail to inform that people can break the law w/o issue, which is opposite of what we're talking about
-
Opposite and symmetrical. We pretend people can’t drive 10mph over, and that citizens can obey 300,000 pages of law, because law is law.
-
the risks are asymmetrical- consider forgetting to mention that it's not okay to stone someone to death for heresy
-
while it's sometimes okay to kill ppl (in self-defense), not an argument that you didn't realize a kind of killing wasn't implicitly allowed
-
and as far as the car analogy goes- we have driving tests for a reason
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.