Attempting to turn people into worshippers of an ideology, which is what every ideology-based society tries to do, is a flawed endeavor to begin with....
I lean strongly towards there being an ethical duty not to cause harm to others. I don't believe there to be an ethical duty to cause good to others, ...
A very literal answer to my question, but ok. Does it suffice? If we can justify making a major imposition on someone else based on self-confidence, t...
What a strange policy. Voting lends legitimacy to a system, so essentially they're forcing their citizens to acknowledge the system as legitimate. An ...
While this supposition is obviously a bit of a stretch, I would say the following: 1). Just like the procreator has no right to decide for another the...
You'll need to elaborate on that, though honestly what we call it may not be all that relevant. Why would self-confidence suffice in the case of procr...
I think suffering is inherent to life. It even seems to be inherent to happiness (does happiness still have meaning without suffering to contrast it t...
That has never stopped anyone. It certainly hasn't stopped you in the past. Remember how your beliefs lead to one committing infinite moral transgress...
Go ahead and argue that not causing irreversible harm to others without their consent isn't a basic moral belief most people hold. I'd love to hear ab...
I think the objection would be that many here believe us not just to be victims, but also beneficiaries. Would that change the nature of the pyramid s...
Strictly speaking you're right, of course. What I sought to convey was that procreation breaks some rules that many procreators themselves would consi...
Probability is just a fundamentally flawed way of approaching these things, but: One should definitely avoid actions that: 1). Cannot be performed con...
Leaning on probability is just an admission of ignorance. One may need probability because one doesn't understand the cause and effect behind a certai...
Exactly so, however it has been Isaac's argument that one is thereby creating conditions for harm, and is thus immoral. (The way this ties back into t...
And when the person we pushed out of the proverbial plane goes splat on the ground, what are we to make of that? Excuse ourselves because we thought t...
No, an intention does not mean involvement. I may consider getting involved and then decide not to, and I wasn't involved before, during or after the ...
If I have at any point made it clear to the builders I was intending to build a house with them, then it's a different story. In a sense I have now ta...
This is basically my position aswell. The example I like to use is when two people are stranded in the wilderness and they need to cross a river. One ...
_____ Because it is the builders desire to build a house, and I am an uninvolved bystander, obviously. Nonsense. It's neutral because it causes no har...
My argument doesn't rest on whether or not I know. In fact, it's indeed our ignorance of the consequences that should make us think twice before havin...
You're making assumptions about things that are unknown and attributing harm to conditions they supposedly create, that's why it's relevant. You were ...
Let's say we know the exact figures. 9:1 in favor of pushing someone out of the plane. Surely it is not up to the pusher to decide that they like thos...
Your argument is that a change in conditions takes place through my deliberation, when in fact it is unknown whether the conditions will change until ...
I didn't say the decision is already made. I said that we don't know our final decision until we make it. It's never in a state that the house can be ...
That's just another way of saying you didn't know. Haha, yes. Where is the causation in this story? Condition A: No house. > "Neurons fire" Condition ...
Essentially, yes. What else would you conclude if you believe to be available but ultimately it turns out you're not? Only that you apparently didn't ...
I didn't know whether I would be available, clearly. If I thought I would be available and turn out not to be, then clearly I didn't know if I was ava...
No one's. No change took place. The condition under which the house could not be built was in place all along, the builders simply didn't have the inf...
Physical actions. Not that much, in fact. The rules of chess guide behavior for individuals playing chess. Morals guide behavior for individuals in li...
This is a very weak argument. It's like putting a ring through someone's nose when they're asleep, only to tell them "If you don't like it, just rip i...
Some of it is caused by ignorance, but roughly speaking yes. If one is aware of the risks (so ignorance is not a factor) and takes the risk, then one ...
I don't think it creates conditions. You seem to be deliberately trying to misunderstand what I'm trying to say. I won't play that game. This obviousl...
It makes no difference. When the builders come to ask the conditions are that four people are available. When I make my intentions known that conditio...
I do not. It would merely inform the builders what the conditions are. Before the builders ask my help the condition is that there are four people ava...
Sure. But that is not what was proposed. What was proposed before was that my availability was already decided, and that to dissent was to create cond...
Yes. I'm not in control over the ideas in other individuals' heads for which I may or may not be available. Those activities aren't reasonable at all....
Negative. Availability is something that exists in the mind of some other individual. It is not some objective state, which is what you're trying to s...
It's a notion that doesn't exist to an uninvolved bystander. It's the person who has the desire to build a house that creates it. Perhaps so, but I do...
Like I said, I was never available in the first place. So that condition was already in place - I did not create it. Four people have a desire to crea...
Parents are aware of the harm that may befall their child, so it is intentional. They just assume on the child's behalf that the harm will outweigh th...
What you're missing is the fact that this presupposes the person in question was a participant in the first place. That's what I take issue with - tha...
Nice post, some interesting points. Though, I don't think the idea of a "midnight deal" with Ukraine would have been very realistic. Ukraine is one of...
I suppose this is close to what I would say. The thing is, you presuppose the individual to be a part of something. A circle, a group of people availa...
Surely this man will not be condemned just for his shoddy work ethic, but also for the harm he has caused the children. Or does he get to justify hims...
The issue is that you are trying to equate non-interference to acting. Creating conditions and direct causality are both relevant, but in the case of ...
Comments