4 ms·
> it's that this is literally what the killer wrote And? What's the objection to that?
by arbitrage 9y ago
> it's that this is literally what the killer wrote
And? What's the objection to that?
- AnimalMuppet 9y agoLet's say A had some theories, and said what they are, and went out and killed some people based on those theories. And let's say that B had some similar theories, and said what they are. Rejecting A's ideas because those ideas led A to murder is somewhat defensible. It's evidence that there is something deeply morally flawed in A's thinking. Rejecting B's ideas because they are similar to A's is shakier. B's ideas deserve a hearing on the merits. (Ideas have consequences, and A has shown what A thinks the consequences are. Those consequences can reasonably be considered part of the "merits" of A's ideas.)