4 ms·
It's not an "edge point". One can discuss the inherent moral goodness or lack thereof of using a certain tool, whereas you seem to subscribe to the view that s
by Jun8 10y ago
It's not an "edge point". One can discuss the inherent moral goodness or lack thereof of using a certain tool, whereas you seem to subscribe to the view that something is bad if "evil people" use it and not otherwise. With similar train of thought one may argue that nuclear weapons are good for the US to have but not for an evil empire such as the USSR (actual argument that was used by people), or a gun is bad when it's used by a criminal but good when used by someone in self-defense.
You see that in these cases one can discuss the merits of the application but also argue about the whole ban of the tool itself, irregardless of who's using it.
Also if you hate HN noone is forcing you to be here.
- imgabe 10y agoA tool cannot have inherent moral goodness or lack it. A tool is inanimate. It is amoral. By itself it does nothing. Only humans can put tools to uses that may be good or bad for other humans. Morality does not exist outside of human perception.
- mschuster91 10y ago> A tool cannot have inherent moral goodness or lack it. I disagree. A registry of Muslim/Jewish/... people is a tool with inherent discrimination, which has next to no known good use for society. Only for evil.
- 67726e 10y agoThe tool would be a database, the use is a registry. Also, have you never heard of a census?
- mschuster91 10y ago> Also, have you never heard of a census? In a proper census you do not collect proven-sensitive information together with identifiable information, that's the difference. A database with a direct link between identity and religion can only be used for nefarious purposes.
- PuercoPop 10y agoThey mentioned the census as a use of database (tool) that is not immoral not as being equivalent to a Muslim/Jewish registry. You seem to be missing their point