It's not an assumption it's a definition. I think most here would agree that social censure and moral duty are different things. For instance, if I gr...
This assumes that at some point in time there was a moral duty to be kind. I don't think there was. This is not to say that there is no social pressur...
Where was this implied exactly? It'd be much better if that were the case. But the most important is for the members to not harm each other. Acting ki...
In an abusive relationship you could cause harm by breaking up because doing so will alleviate more form yourself. I don't know what you mean by "harm...
Yea I said X as in it can take on whatever value. Fair enough. And I would actually agree that in cases where X is large enough having children is mor...
As I said: Children are a special case because it’s your job as a parent to make sure they don’t do something stupid. You don’t do that for adults or ...
Sounds pretty ridiculous. It would be a different world if there was a law that incarcerated people who do not donate to the poor. Being obligated to ...
You know for a fact that a vaccine doesn't harm. That's non-negotiable. And children are a bit of a special case where doing harm now to alleviate har...
No it wouldn't though. My personal assessment of whether life is worth living should be applied for myself, not for others. Just because I find life w...
But none where you cause more pain than you alleviate. When I talk of “harm” I mean causing more than you alleviate. So vaccinating a child isn’t harm...
So are pain and heartbreak. Yet we agree you shouldn’t cause those. I don’t know where you get that. I’m just saying you can’t derive a should from a ...
I don’t think it’s weird. Everybody eats. Doesn’t make it moral or immoral. I think it’s wrong yes, but I don’t see how that has to do with what I’ve ...
To establish that you are not obligated to have kids because of the good it will do. In the same sense that you’re not obligated to help others with p...
This is usually because we have a stupid habit (myself included) of assuming the other person is starting form the same premises as us. In whichcase t...
Exactly what it says. Why would I not save a drowning person if I can? Make up your mind please. Is it or is it not a duty? That's not an answer. Why ...
But I would assist them so what difference does it make? And I would furthermore argue, again, that I'm not the only one that doesn't see such an obli...
I'm implying that if everyone agreed on a moral obligation to save drowning people, it is very likely that there would be a law incarcerating people w...
Right. But "what rules would we want everyone to follow" is not answered by "What does everyone usually do" (in this case save drowning person). becau...
What do you mean "agree on"? All we've established is that we would both save a drowning person. That says nothing about the morality of it. If we bot...
If someone drowns and there are 20 people watching, do they get incarcerated? No. So I don't think society sees this as an obligation. How come you ca...
And also not my idea. Where did I say "Whose only duty is not to interfere". You can help if you want, you just don't have to. I don't understand why ...
I don’t have many of those. Outside of having to try and make up to someone after harming them you don’t really have to do anything morally speaking o...
Yes but this is not just a “consideration” it’s a logical argument. If you say that a person experiences X harm due to not having children then all ha...
Nah. Sounds like bs to me. Will have to go back and read more closely. Anyways, about the whole charity/drowning thing. Care to answer why one is obli...
First, are you claiming that doing an act that doesn't 100% guarantee harm is okay? Because that's what it sounds like you're saying here: and here: I...
I understand the difference. In an early reply I outlined this What I don't understand is what makes charity optional but saving people from drowning ...
If I'm understanding this correctly I think it's laughable. We can all agree that murdering people by shooting them is wrong correct? However when you...
That's not what I understood you were saying Is this "therefore you should do it" a moral obligation or a moral act? I thought you meant it as an obli...
No moral obligation either way. It is better for your health to refrain from doing so. No moral obligation. I didn't say "moral property". I said "mor...
Why is charity a moral act but saving a drowning person is a moral obligation? You sound like you're just dodging the question by rephrasing the thing...
I'd go further to say that there is no such thing as a "positive moral duty". If it's a duty then doing it is what is expected, it is not positive. If...
Yes. This is different form "I think I shouldn't". What do you mean "transactional"? The alternative would be either I must not help them (which we ca...
I would save them assuming I can swim. I'm saying I don't have to. That I don't owe them anything. I see helping others with problems you didn't cause...
I would. If you didn't get them there you don't owe them saving. At least not as much as you owe them not getting them there. That's not "harm" as I u...
You can argue that your next child is going to cure cancer. But you can also argue that your next child is Hitler 2 electric boogaloo. So it makes no ...
This seems to me to say that there are actually ineffable private directly apprehensible meaningful experiences. Just that they are not necessarily fo...
Critical misunderstanding. Antinatalism isn't about how life is bad all the time. Antinatalism is about how the risk of causing a bad life is justific...
For either side. In the same way you can argue that my existing risks harming others severely I may argue that my death risks harming others severely....
Because I am part of this calculation too. The "expected value" of the harm I would cause unto others is much lower than the "expected value" of the h...
Comments