[jjk166]

> Sotp, just stop! This is the idea that we must punish and scantion people into being good.

You're not understanding what this conversation is about. Taboos punish and sanction people into being good. We are in full agreement that this is undesirable. There are some things that should be banned, and if they should be banned, they should be banned explicitly. There are many other things that should not be banned, and if it should not be banned it should not be a taboo, which is a form of ban.

You give a perfect example for my argument - treating drug addiction as an illness that should be treated instead of a moral failure to be punished. Where drug use is a taboo, you can't treat it; eliminating the taboo and accepting that these are people in need of help is, in my and many other people's opinion, the correct course of action. Most would agree that making drug use legal but ostracizing drug users would be an absurd strategy.

Taboos are fundamentally about what is permissible and impermissible, there is no other framework in which to talk about them.

[worik]

> There are some things that should be banned, and if they should be banned, they should be banned explicitly.

What about the things that are missed? Are you going to make an explicit rule for every bad thing?

Is the only way to be good, to be punished?

The creative bad folks, they are free to do their bad stuff, so long as they are more creative than the rule makers?

I do not want to live in the world where the only reason good things happen, is because all the options for being bad are outlawed

I want to live in a world, li,e the one I mostly live in, where we cooperate and love one another.

I am not advocating taboos. I am advocating the literal opposite