When Theft Was Worse Than Murder
nautil.us
When Theft Was Worse Than Murder
1–10 of 52 posts
Re: When Theft Was Worse Than Murder
#2[deleted]
Re: When Theft Was Worse Than Murder
#3This article could use some nice infographics and charts. The way it is written makes it hard to see exactly how things have changed over time.
Re: When Theft Was Worse Than Murder
#4This article could use some nice infographics and charts. The way it is written makes it hard to see exactly how things have changed over time.
Agreed. What I would really love to see is whether a "historical economist" (or whatever those are called) could estimate the statistical value of a human life as defined by people's own revealed preferences. This is the sort of calculation where we infer how much each of us values our own lives based on the amount we are willing to pay to avoid small chances of death. In the US today, the number is about $8 million now, and is surprisingly consistent (within a factor of 2) over many possible inference methods.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life#Life_Value_in_th...
(Of course, there are exceptions where people effectively pay rates of many billion dollars per life to avoid emotionally salient risks, like terrorism.)
The OP article gives the misleading impression that society's changing values are mostly due to moral progress (presumably arising, I guess, from people being persuaded by moral arguments, or from certain societal norms taking hold). But it's almost certainly the case that you can explain the vast majority of the change by economic developments, especially following the dramatic rise in per capita wealth starting with the industrial revolution. The dark implication of this is that if per capita wealth falls drastically in the future, which is possible depending on technological developments, then we are likely to see a regression in moral attitudes.
Re: When Theft Was Worse Than Murder
#5If you're interested in the main thesis of this article -- that the reason that our attitudes to violence declined steadily was due to a feedback loop "feeding the output of the Old Bailey the day before to the input of the Old Bailey the day after.", I highly recommend "The Better Angels of our Nature" by Steven Pinker.
Re: When Theft Was Worse Than Murder
#6This article could use some nice infographics and charts. The way it is written makes it hard to see exactly how things have changed over time.
Agreed. What I would really love to see is whether a "historical economist" (or whatever those are called) could estimate the statistical value of a human life as defined by people's own revealed preferences. This is the sort of calculation where we infer how much each of us values our own lives based on the amount we are willing to pay to avoid small chances of death. In the US today, the number is about $8 million…
Interesting. My take on it is slightly different: it feels like a necessary condition of economic progress is that you trust that you will get to keep the fruits of your labours.
The way this happened in our history (I'm assuming that it's not the only way) is through institutions like The Old Bailey and the codification of laws and the visibility into the not always completely fair, but always getting fairer, application of those laws that they provided.
Re: When Theft Was Worse Than Murder
#7If you're interested in the main thesis of this article -- that the reason that our attitudes to violence declined steadily was due to a feedback loop "feeding the output of the Old Bailey the day before to the input of the Old Bailey the day after.", I highly recommend "The Better Angels of our Nature" by Steven Pinker.
I read that book. It was very enlightening to say the least.
That being said, my view is in line with the book: cautiously optimistic.
I believe that the domestication of mankind will continue, but that isn't inevitable. Maybe in the future, the trend will reverse. It's up to us and our responsibility to ensure that doesn't happen and to accelerate the trend of less violence over time.
Re: When Theft Was Worse Than Murder
#8Murder is theft. The worst kind of theft
Re: When Theft Was Worse Than Murder
#9This article could use some nice infographics and charts. The way it is written makes it hard to see exactly how things have changed over time.
Agreed. What I would really love to see is whether a "historical economist" (or whatever those are called) could estimate the statistical value of a human life as defined by people's own revealed preferences. This is the sort of calculation where we infer how much each of us values our own lives based on the amount we are willing to pay to avoid small chances of death. In the US today, the number is about $8 million…
If you are interested in how much people have valued a human life, in money units, throughout history, I can give you at least one recommendation.
Medieval Iceland lived for 300 years without a government. Murder was punished by fine or exile, or becoming a slave or worse, an outlaw, if they refused to pay their debt to the victim's kin. This period is very well documented. Maybe you could find the exact value murderers were fined. That would give us a data point for 1000 years ago.
Re: When Theft Was Worse Than Murder
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. What I would really love to see is whether a "historical economist" (or whatever those are called) could estimate the statistical value of a human life as defined by people's own revealed preferences. This is the sort of calculation where we infer how much each of us values our own lives based on the amount we are willing to pay to avoid small chances of death. In the US today, the number is about $8 million…
Interesting. My take on it is slightly different: it feels like a necessary condition of economic progress is that you trust that you will get to keep the fruits of your labours. The way this happened in our history (I'm assuming that it's not the only way) is through institutions like The Old Bailey and the codification of laws and the visibility into the not always completely fair, but always getting fairer, applic…
Well, I agree that certain institutions for law and order appear to be prerequisites for the sort of economic/technological progress that occurred during the industrial revolution. And it is plausible (though definitely not obvious) to me that such institutions really did arise from the slow and steady accumulation of ideas. But the sacredness of life as compared to property seems mostly a result of per capital wealth. I'd guess we can find many times and places in history where there have been periods of predictable (and reasonably just) law and order, without the sacredness of life.