@Astorre@Tom Storm@Banno@Outlander@ChatteringMonkey@I like sushi@83nt0n thoughts?

Was expected.

You couldn't provide a viable solution either.

Why not support my argument of a minarchist state with no constitution, then?

I used them as a reference. Do you have any answer to the initial question?

we're discussing the rightful authorship from idealistic/principial grounds. The components of the constitution is not in question here.

Isn't this far too generic? — Outlander

You're right, principles can have subjective value. But doctrines are universally codified. You can choose to follow them or make something out of it (upon which it becomes a new doctrine).

Such as communism → socialism, nihilism → absurdism, etc.

I wonder if our fascination with questions that don't matter has ever been given serious study. But now I think of it, that may not matter either. — Ciceronianus

Principles are more important than practicality. It sets the standard for our actions.

When you break the principles, be it secular or religious, you get an estimation of how deviant your actions have become. You feel bad when you go so far. Even though you're not following the principles line by line, it's working as a compass. But when there is no principle, you'll have no direction. You'll have no restraint. You'll have nothing to shape your life. Be it personal moral codes or societal. Much like law and order.

Isn't legitimacy only a thing if there is already an established (legal) order? Or what do you take the word to mean? — ChatteringMonkey

take it as "logical or acceptable in principle".

There is doctrine, there is hypothesis, then there is fantasy.

I'm touching on doctrine here.

Can you point out where in my argument you found a flaw and counter it by quoting it?

It puts you in jail.

Suggest a solution on who should write the constitution?

I'm talking consequences here.

I'm talking about the world you and I live in.

unless you live in a world with no formal law or government or police, i don't know what you're talking about.

we act as our conscience dictates not the laws of the land. — I like sushi

but jail/police doesn't follow your conscience.

but there are laws and that makes you a criminal.

I see. I'd love your counterarguments against minarchism.

No Constitution seems to be the only answer.

I presented the options with counterarguments to see if any of you can come up with an alternative.

The mandate of heaven — ChatteringMonkey

Theocracy? What if the people are secular and prefer free will?

What's your take on minarchism?

WHO WRITES the constitution?

How do millions (or billions for India and China) of people come under the same roof and draft a publicly acclaimed constitution?

Who writes it?

Morality is an abstract concept that, alongside psychology, is a physical construct made by hormonal and neural activities.

Yes, we'd have to standardize those terms.