If it is moral and rational to act in your own self-interest, then why wouldn't you disintegrate the homeless man? — darthbarracuda
I'll weigh in on this: it's wrong to lie, but we shouldn't outlaw lying.
The government need not intervene every time you are wronged. — Hanover
So if we agree that I shall deliver you beef meat, and instead I deliver you horse meat, claiming that it is beef, and you take it, assuming it to be beef, I have done you no harm? If I have done you no harm, how can finding the truth harm you? Finding the truth in and by itself can certainly cause you no harm, can it?
If as a doctor I tell you that I'll give you an analgesic, and instead I give you a poison that will not only put you to sleep, but will also kill you, have I not harmed you? Afterall, you'll never know! — Agustino
If we have a contract together and I break it, without you knowing it, have I harmed you? — Agustino
The liability of encouraging and facilitating access to illegal activity. That in itself is culpable. — Agustino
Donating is obligatory iff it will save X.
If one person doesn't donate then X cannot be saved.
Therefore if one person doesn't donate then the others are not obligated to donate. — Michael
X ought be saved iff X can be saved.
X can be saved iff all Ys donate.
Therefore, all Ys ought to donate.
Therefore some Ys ought to donate. — Michael
If gratuitous suffering is such a problem, and if it costs me very little to perform some action that would alleviate, eliminate, or reduce some gratuitous suffering, why am I not obligated to do so? — Postmodern Beatnik
Is this the only condition on which we can inflict or risk gratuitous suffering on ourselves? — Postmodern Beatnik
The problem is that P6 is not necessarily true depending on the subject. As far as I can tell it comes closest to being true when everyone adopts a vegan diet. There is no direct link between the person who eats the animal and the treatment of the animal. It could well be that my going vegan does not have any effect on the animals that are farmed, chances are my super market is not going to order less meat because I am no longer buying from them. — shmik
Do we invent technology, or do we discover technology, or both? — darthbarracuda
There is virtually no personal political executive agency inside the contemporary State. — Bitter Crank
It merely claims that homosexuals should be helped to live under regimes which favor their disposition. — Agustino
Slaveowners could do whatever they wanted to their slaves. If you think conservatives can do whatever they want to you, then I suggest you seek the help of a medical professional. — Agustino
My interests and the rights that I need to fulfil them change depending on where I am born. — Agustino
I wouldn't call them human rights, I'd call them the rights that a particular state grants its citizens. Again, the justification for calling those rights "human" assumes that there exists a power structure capable of guaranteeing those rights to all humans. As no such structure exists, or can indeed exist (our differences are too many; + it's too dangerous since it would be too powerful), we are left solely with rights granted to us by our nation. — Agustino
As for what rights I want - that is a question that presupposes that I am a member of a certain society. — Agustino
However, I do not think that the risk-averse assumption goes through. — Postmodern Beatnik
The trouble here is that humans have different capacities for suffering than animals. — Postmodern Beatnik
You're going to need at least one more clause here. — Postmodern Beatnik
So, before I go into the question of refuting Rawls, it is you who must prove that there is a group called humanity. — Agustino
So inequality is sustained by Nature herself, and has nothing to do with man. — Agustino
Well it is intolerance when you assume, without prior demonstration, that "equal rights" is universally a value, and therefore you can impose it on other people. Who are you to fight to impose "equal rights" on me? Maybe I don't like this "equal rights". Am I morally wrong if I don't? If you say yes, then you need to mobilise an argument which explains both the origin of this value "equal rights" and its universality. Something that is sorely lacking at the moment. — Agustino
Instead of the leftist position that others must observe rights, I much rather prefer the conservative position that others must not interfere with rights. It seems both more tolerant, and more ethical. — Agustino
"X is immoral" they are often telling others how to behave. — Michael
Meta-ethics is prior to normative ethics. Before we can discuss whether or not the the moral value of X is determined by duty or by consequences we have to determine what it means for X to be moral (or immoral). — Michael
If someone tells me that some X is immoral then they are usually telling me not to do X — Michael
P9 If it is wrong to allow gratuitous suffering caused by food production practices, and gratuitous suffering caused by food productions practices is preventable if and only if a vegan diet is adopted (by [ oneself as a member in ] the set referred to in P6), then one ought to ensure that a vegan diet is adopted by [ oneself as a member in ] the set referred to in P6. — shmik
This is because each individual does not necessarily play a contributory role in causing suffering. — shmik
Or, put another way, isn't DNA itself very close to the ancient idea of 'essence'? — Wayfarer