Difference between revisions of "A Positive Model Of Rights"
From Critiques Of Libertarianism
| Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
'''Benefits''' (B), '''Opportunity Costs''' (O), '''Penalties''' (P), '''Cost''' (C) and '''Fees''' (F) are all assumed to be values | '''Benefits''' (B), '''Opportunity Costs''' (O), '''Penalties''' (P), '''Cost''' (C) and '''Fees''' (F) are all assumed to be values | ||
| − | that are fungible in some manner. That doesn't require the form of modern markets: indeed, tit-for-tat and other strategies that work with a simpler form of fungibility can serve to exchange life, labor, time, or other values. These values will differ in the cases where DutyBearers '''cooperate''' (thus having Opportunity Costs (O<sub>c</sub>) whose values are negative to the DutyBearers and | + | that are fungible in some manner. That doesn't require the form of modern markets: indeed, tit-for-tat and other strategies that work with a simpler form of fungibility can serve to exchange life, labor, time, or other values. These values will differ in the cases where DutyBearers '''cooperate''' (thus having Opportunity Costs (O<sub>c</sub>) whose values are negative to the DutyBearers and no cooperating Penalties (P<sub>c</sub>)) versus where DutyBearers '''defect''' (thus having Opportunity Costs (O<sub>d</sub>) whose values are positive to the DutyBearers and high defecting Penalties (P<sub>d</sub>)). |
Arguably, the examples can be simpler than this model: for example when a RightHolder is his own Enforcer or the DutyBearer is also the Thing (as in the case of a slaveowner), but that may not make the model more explanatory and may make it more difficult to compare to alternative uses of this model. The fees in this model show possible sources of income for enforcement: some of them might be zero. This model might need more complexity or be used multiple times to handle heterogeneous DutyBearers, such as slaves and abolitionists.<includeonly> | Arguably, the examples can be simpler than this model: for example when a RightHolder is his own Enforcer or the DutyBearer is also the Thing (as in the case of a slaveowner), but that may not make the model more explanatory and may make it more difficult to compare to alternative uses of this model. The fees in this model show possible sources of income for enforcement: some of them might be zero. This model might need more complexity or be used multiple times to handle heterogeneous DutyBearers, such as slaves and abolitionists.<includeonly> | ||
