address what I mean by freedom [here](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/two-concepts-of-freedom) and [here](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/why-free-will-exists). They were linked in the article as well. If you find anything specifically inaccurate or something that I can clarify

real world sense). And I argue why these reason-based principles have moral weight [here](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/the-social-contract-part-1-why-is) and [here](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/why-should-i-be-moral).

specific facts create rights. Their application specifies what these rights are (I provide [this linked article](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/is-the-constitution-dead-or-alive)as an example, to show how constitutional principles applied based on reason, create rights). This resolves ... prioritization problem can be resolved by examining the meta-principles of certain rights (this [linked article](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/in-defense-of-hypothetical-consent) is provided as an example of how our moral/legal rules of consent are based on meta

social contract. I argue for its meta-ethical basis and its moral authority [here](https://neonomos.substack.com/publish?utm_source=menu) and [here](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/the-social-contract-part-1-why-is).

Thanks for the review! I describe what I mean by freedom [here](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/two-concepts-of-freedom) and its moral relevance [here](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/the-social-contract-part-2-why-freedom), if that helps

truly objective, well-being or challenge? I actually discuss this issue in my last section [here](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/freedom-vs-utility) (although my thoughts need some more fleshing

contract. Not all ethics is naturalistic. This substack makes the case for ethical non-naturalism [here](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/the-social-contract-part-1-why-is). To provide an analogy, its more like math than science

those principles, but it can apply them and prioritize them differently based on reason). See [here](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/there-are-no-natural-rights-without) for a discussion on how the social contract can specify rights. And the error

hypothetical social contract, where free people accept certain reasonable non-rejectable principles (as described [here](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/the-social-contract-part-1-why-is)). All of ethics is constructed in this metaphysical sense. Yet rights exist in that we have certain

addressed hypothetical consent [here](https://neonomos.substack.com/p/in-defense-of-hypothetical-consent). Summary: You can't have moral principles of actual consent without reference to the social contract, which relies on hypothetical consent. Actual consent depends on hypothetical consent