Culture and Respect

[eyemixer]

Thanks for the answer to the first question, but you only partially quoted my second question and failed to answer it. I would appreciate an answer.

Well, you mean that there is a third party, the state, that enacts these laws. The state has the right to do this via the might of punishment. And it reserves this right by its might

I think that you don't really understand the concept of might. In truth, the real might in your scenario lies with the man who performs the hit, as it is him who pulls the trigger, i.e. holds life and death in his hand.

Which is it?

I use death as an example as it tends to be a non-reversible condition. I also could care less about how much 'might' I have by causing such an action, so arguing how that action does not grant me 'might' seems a bit pointless.

So what you seem to be saying is that stealing your food (or killing you, or any application of force against your will) is the 'right' thing to do if I can do it. So if I was the one to 'pull the trigger' then killing you would be the right thing to do?

It seems your ONLY definition of 'right' is what is compelled by the more powerful, and NO OTHER definition of 'right' is correct. Am I characterizing your position correctly?