|
I think being a murderer is a wrong way to be a human being. That seems pretty obvious.
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 03:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:But you see, it's only murder when it definitely shouldn't be done, according to my personal judgement. Problem solved. Huh?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:I made an uncharitable guess as to your response to Bip's objection. You should dispute it with them, and prove me an rear end in a top hat. More lazy than uncharitable, I think. There's like three better responses than that one off the top of my head. Here's one: Bip Roberts posted:Please respect the Troops. No court on earth thinks killing in war is murder???
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
Doorknob Slobber posted:isn't the definition of murder something like "Illegal killing of another person". Using terms that rely on laws to make absolute moral judgement seems bad. You can think that everyone who kills someone unlawfully has done something wrong without thinking that what made it wrong was that it was illegal. Obviously. It's pretty silly to think you can read someone's moral theory off of a single asserted moral fact.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
Refusing to acknowledge basic moral facts on the basis of 'but can we ever agree?!' is pretty feeble. Right up there with 'but how can we ever, like, really know anything?' for faux-sophistication. What kind of person ever thought people had to agree to facts in order for them to be true?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2016 06:02
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:If I make a moral judgment, it's a fact that i've made it, but the judgment is not a fact. Is this view one of the sort that you come to on the basis of some reasons, or is it the other kind?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:I find the distinction useful in practice, and think it could be dangerous to erase it. You think we shouldn't think that we shouldn't do things with bad effects, on the grounds that thinking that would have bad effects? Incredible. Anyway, I'm not sure what someone could possibly think 'fact' means, other than 'state of affairs that obtains in the actual world.'
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
Doorknob Slobber posted:To me, killing someone is neither wrong nor right regardless of legality especially if without talking about the circumstances that led to killing someone. The statement "All murderers are bad people" is in my mind somewhat untrue because it places moral responsibility on systems of law that are usually extremely flawed. I also think there are plenty of situations where killing someone is justified, but you might also be convicted of murder and become a murderer. This is a lovely argument whose success depends our having some independent way of judging whether or not a killing is morally justified. So I happily accept your conclusion: there are factors other than legal proscription that determine of an action whether or not it is wrong. It should be clear that this is distinct from the conclusion that there are no moral facts, which I reject.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2016 23:25
|
|