I did not sleep well last night. My brain was obviously playing around with a question, because I kept waking up looking for answers. At first the question was,
If I could only come up with one rule for a society, what would it be?
Note that this would not be a rule for all the different ways in which people should treat each other. Be nice. (But to what degree?) Give to charity. (But how much?) Call your grandma. (But how often?)
Rather, I was mulling over one rule as to how people must treat each other. A single categorical imperative. An “if we could only have one rule, what would it be” kind of rule.
The words of that rule, in my half-asleep brain, were something like this:
Each person is a sovereign, rights-holding being whose consent must not be violated and who must not be subjected to the initiation of coercive force.
That covers a significant amount of ground in a fairly compact package. But would it be enough?
Later, as night gave way to early morning, the question shifted slightly—the number of rules allowed went from one to five. And as I drifted to consciousness, this is what I came up with (cleaned up somewhat, now that I am actually awake):
Each and every individual human is a unique, separate, irreplaceable, sovereign, self-owning person with the natural right to control his or her own life, and equal claim to all the rights hereunder illuminated:
The human person must not be subjected to the initiation of coercive force.
The human person must not be subjected to any transaction or imposition of authority to which he or she does not explicitly consent.
The human person has the natural right to engage in any activity that does not initiate coercive force upon any other.
The human person, alone or in cooperation with others, has the natural right to deploy protective force in response to and to defend against coercive force, and to seek restitution for acts of coercive force.
(Yes, this sort of thing occasionally disturbs my sleep. Occupational hazard.)
This post is not intended to be a final answer, necessarily, but rather fodder for discussion. What is missing? What if you only had five rules to work with? What is absolutely sine qua non? What covers the most ground?
Opinions wanted!
First time around, I asked AI to “Please give me an image of people in a village square all happily agreeing to six moral rules for a happy society.” Look at that bizarre sign!
If you define what sovereignty entails and that the rest of these expressions of coercive force are also considered coercive force, you're back down to one rule to rule them all.
I will come back here when I have a functional brain :) Nice sign. SNRIGGLEMRPHZZAMODITS is not even on it, go figure :)