481–484 of 484 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> These are obvious to those who know them, and useless (or dangerous, even) to the rest. That sounds like a dangerous way to think about things.
Quite the opposite. The dangerous people are the ones who think morality is something you can negotiate about. That's a recipe for unethical behavior. Ethical principles != Fundamentalism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quite the opposite. The dangerous people are the ones who think morality is something you can negotiate about. That's a recipe for unethical behavior. Ethical principles != Fundamentalism.
If you don't reason about things, how can you know you are right?
You see a little girl running toward a minefield, you jump and save her, there is no reasoning. For many who believe in God (not my case) it is something you know is right, but has no reasoning behind.
But here it's just some moral principles that are above the law, above the country, and sometime even above oneself. That's what Snowden and Manning teach us (or me, at least)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you don't reason about things, how can you know you are right?
That's true for up to some level, but above that you arrive to some ether where rationality is useless or even dangerous. You see a little girl running toward a minefield, you jump and save her, there is no reasoning. For many who believe in God (not my case) it is something you know is right, but has no reasoning behind. But here it's just some moral principles that are above the law, above the country, and sometime…
> You see a little girl running toward a minefield, you jump and save her, there is no reasoning.
You see a little girl standing on top of a tall building, a crowd gathered below. You grow frustrated, tension rises. You start chanting "Jump! Jump!" and watch the girl throw herself to her death. There's no reasoning. [1]
I don't think anecdotes like that prove much. Human nature has us do things without thinking, for better and sometimes for worse. I don't think these moments of impulse necessarily embody any higher principle, or stand "above" rationality.
Having moral principles that stand "above" the law is fine: those will let you decide in favour of what's moral instead of what's legal. But that's still reasoning.
[1] This is surprisingly common when people jump from buildings.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Basically this is the only answer. I think of this (but rarely say it) when I hear people talk about supporting our troops and honoring their service. I don't honor people who willingly decide to be put in situations that almost certainly will be immoral. The immoral act starts when you volunteer to join the gang that commits it.
LOL. SERIOUSLY? I just met a guy who lost his legs to an IED that he KNEW was on the route he was ordered to take because they needed to get from A to B in the quickest possible time. He volunteered to go himself (he was the Captain of the platoon) but his team refused to let him make the run himself. That was the THIRD IED he was hit by. I'm glad we have people who are willing to risk their lives for us, no question…
Don't act like the people joining the military do it for some high flying idea of honor and defense of the country. They join in droves because they get to have an adventure with the feeling of danger but extremely low chance of injury. If we were actually fighting a real enemy that really could do us harm, I /might/ call that bravery.
You have an antiquated view of what it is to be "more of a man". You seem to be stuck in the past where blindly killing the others is somehow a good thing without stopping to think about the reasons. How about, why was your friend walking around in a foreign country in the first place?
I like how you couldn't try making your point with a reasoned argument, you had to use ad hominem. Classy.