5 ms·

gkoberger, You have compassion for the human condition and an ability to put yourself in other people's shoes. That is a skill that is lost so easily today. I

by rkalla 16y ago

gkoberger, You have compassion for the human condition and an ability to put yourself in other people's shoes. That is a skill that is lost so easily today. I don't know that many people that still can do this. As expected, lionhearted's more absolute "He's a thief, QED!" opinion is a more popular reply (looking at the votes). lionhearted is surely welcome to his own opinion, I just don't think life is ever as black and white as we think it is. Just added this comment because I know the mass majority of people will read your comment, nod their head in agreement and move on and with the voting trending the way it is, you might get the impression that you were "wrong" and re-think your position of trying to understand someone before condemning them. I just wanted to make sure that didn't happen.

jerf 16y ago
I think you're trying to cast the "He's a thief, QED!" opinion as the "black and white" opinion while you have the more sophisticated "it depends" opinion, but I think you've got it backwards. The reason why it is important to strongly denounce thievery is actually the second-order effects. A thief almost always "needs" what they have stolen more than the person they stole it from, but that's not the interesting point. The interesting point is that in a society without strong property laws, it is vastly harder to claw your way out of poverty and you have a huge general problem with crime taking a bite out of society's ability to progress. This isn't good for anybody, not even the proximate thief who will still be better off in a prosperous society than one dragged down by pervasive crime. The hard-line "He's a thief" attitude is the sophisticated view, and wishy-washy "well, I suppose he needs it more than the first guy" is actually the morally-thin cop-out that refuses to consider the greater good.

by rkalla 16y ago

jerf 16y ago

I think you're trying to cast the "He's a thief, QED!" opinion as the "black and white" opinion while you have the more sophisticated "it depends" opinion, but I think you've got it backwards. The reason why it is important to strongly denounce thievery is actually the second-order effects. A thief almost always "needs" what they have stolen more than the person they stole it from, but that's not the interesting point. The interesting point is that in a society without strong property laws, it is vastly harder to claw your way out of poverty and you have a huge general problem with crime taking a bite out of society's ability to progress. This isn't good for anybody, not even the proximate thief who will still be better off in a prosperous society than one dragged down by pervasive crime. The hard-line "He's a thief" attitude is the sophisticated view, and wishy-washy "well, I suppose he needs it more than the first guy" is actually the morally-thin cop-out that refuses to consider the greater good.