3 ms·
> If we wish to kill him while still being in a society where we won't get killed ourselves kill them in secret in a method that makes it as likely as possible
by flukus 9y ago
> If we wish to kill him while still being in a society where we won't get killed ourselves kill them in secret in a method that makes it as likely as possible that you won't get caught while publicly supporting laws forbidding murder.
If this was normalised then there would be more murdering and we would still be more likely to be murdered ourselves. It's rational that we don't want the world to be like this.
- vivekd 9y agoBut we don't have to normalize every thing we do. This whole "act in a way that everything you do will become normalized" doesn't work because the rational person realizes that not everything they do will be normalized and acts accordingly. This can be found in Neithzche's philosophy when he talks about master and slave ethics. Neithzche said that slaves will follow what custom dictates, but masters will make their own ethics. This seems abhorrent to me, however, in a world without a God dictating things and a hell for bad people, I must admit it is rational. Also the "act in a way that you would will all your actions be normalized" has already been proposed by Kant and has shown to not be workable as an ethical system. (Here's an article explaining why https://tigerpapers.net/2011/10/21/kants-morality/ https://tigerpapers.net/2011/10/21/kants-morality/)
- eveningcoffee 9y agoKilling somebody needs great effort. Killing somebody secretly requires even greater effort. In addition killing involves large risk of getting killed instead. The risk increases when this practice becomes more common. It is simply easier and considerably less risky not do something like this. But there still exists people who argue similarly to your ideas and act based on them. These people are called murderous psychopaths.