I'd say on a personal level the reason for not murdering is a moral one. But on a govt/societal lvl the reason for outlawing it is on principle/practicality. A functioning/civil society needs a sense that privateproperty and life need to be protected
To me, banning murder has to do with practicality, not morality. If we want to live in a civilized society - and who doesn't? - then it's extremely impractical to allow people to go around and kill others for no reason.
kscott: If murder were legal, the economy would probably collapse and society would crumble. There'd be more resources per person, but that means little if people are afraid to leave their homes.
Things like this have to be legislated to account for society's lowest common denominator. And there are people who don't murder people simply because it's illegal.
I can provide moral "proofs" for just about any moral claim, and I can tear down those same proofs just as easily because they all rest on premises we would have to mutually agree on. And those premises rest on premises. Infinite regression.
Your question has some assumed premises, though. That we want to live in a civilized society for example. Or what a civilized society is. Or that murder exists, and that it is somehow different from killing.
Comments: Add Comment