One of the most common sources of confusion in looking at human action is the failure to distinguish the positive from the negative (or the present from the absent). The most fundamental distinction that we must make in any field of study is the difference between what is and what is not. Yet people habitually overlook the absolute difference between situations where a particular human action is present and those where it is absent. We can defer to future sections questions as to what policies should be pursued in the examples below. Nevertheless, as a prerequisite to understanding what is really happening in each example, one must first recognize the absolute difference between the presence of positive action and the absence of such action.

• In editorial commentaries, not offering one's facilities to publish the views of another is often characterized as a positive act of "censorship."

• Not spending public funds on a particular group is depicted as a positive "assault" on or "punishment" of that group.

• Not prosecuting users or sellers, it is said, would constitute a positive moral sanction and support for drugs.

• Not confiscating the fruits of a person's labor is viewed as conferring a special privilege. For example, a tax reduction is described as a "favor" or even a "subsidy" to those whose tax burden is thereby reduced. (One is reminded of the Mafia lords who offer, for a fee, the "privilege" of not torching one's business and not slitting one's throat.)