—–Original Message—–
From: NF
Sent: Mon 10/3/2016 1:05 AM
To: Walter Block
Subject: Re: An Efficiency Objection to Homesteading
Dear Prof. Block: If the (non-aggression principle) N.A.P. isn’t at least partially a moral theory, then under what grounds could you object to murder if we reject interpersonal comparisons of utility, and therefore, utilitarianism? If murder isn’t immoral because it violates the N.A.P. and if it isn’t immoral because the victim loses many more utils then the perpetrator, then under what grounds do you object to it?
Dear NF: I think libertarianism, the NAP, are a (small) part of ethics or morality: that part concerned, solely, with the justified use of violence (in defense only). So, yes, I acquiesce in the notion that libertarianism is an aspect of moral theory. I oppose murder on two grounds; one, it is immoral; it isn’t proper to take an innocent person’s life. This, I can say along with all non-libertarians. Two, I oppose murder because it violates the NAP. That, I can say qua libertarian.
4:54 pm on October 10, 2016
