Anonymous question

Oh, what an interesting question! Generally, the most interesting questions concern various borderline situations, because banalities are already obvious. That is precisely why I will, of course, answer questions about the emancipation of children from parents, about abortions, and about negative externalities, as in this specific case.

I have just mopped the floor, and you walk across the wet surface, slip, and slam the back of your head into it, staining the scrubbed floor with your blood. What is this? A violation of the NAP? No, it is an accident. As a result of the incident, we both have property claims against each other, which we will resolve somehow. In a society of free people who care about their reputation, this would lead, for example, to me helping you call an ambulance, and you jokingly apologizing for messing up the floor. Your insurance will pay for the concussion treatment, I will mop the floor again, and my employer will order that “Caution, slippery floor” signs be put out during cleaning.

Basically, it’s the same thing with epilepsy, just less illustrative. No one has malicious intent, but a combination of circumstances leads to an accident in which someone is hurt, people may have property claims against each other that will have to be settled, and then conclusions will be drawn for the future. One person, the epileptic, will henceforth surprise passersby by walking the streets at night in dark glasses (or simply try not to walk at night without great need). Another, the road owner, for example, will provide brighter diffused lighting, so drivers won’t need to use high beams. A third person, embarrassed that they triggered someone’s epileptic seizure, will more carefully monitor their headlight mode, and so on.

Of course, it may turn out that no one changes anything and no conclusions are drawn; in this worst-case scenario, we simply have the same situation as we do now under state regulation of urban infrastructure—meaning the occurrence is too rare to adapt to.