I think we agree. What are “actual rational agents”? I am new here, so maybe I should do some more reading. I’m sure Eliezer has published extensively on defining that term. My prejudice would be that “actual rational agents” are entities which “rationally” would want to protect their own existence. I mean, they may be “rational”, but they still have self-interest.
We are using approximately the same meaning. (I would only insist that they value something, it doesn’t necessarily have to be their own existence but that’ll do as an example.)
So what I’m saying is that “government” is a system for settling claims between competing rational agents. It’s a set of game rules. Game rules enshrined by rational agents, for the purpose of protecting their own rational self-interests, are rational.
Rational debate, without the existence of these game rules, which is what government is, is impossible. That’s what I’m saying.
I’m disagreeing that government is actually necessary. It is a solution to cooperation problems but not the only one. It just happens to be the one most practical for humans.
We are using approximately the same meaning. (I would only insist that they value something, it doesn’t necessarily have to be their own existence but that’ll do as an example.)
I’m disagreeing that government is actually necessary. It is a solution to cooperation problems but not the only one. It just happens to be the one most practical for humans.
Well, for sufficiently large groups of humans.