3 ms·
Your assumptions seem unlikely. There is no proof moral outrage is on the whole a good thing. No other species requires it. The proper null hypothesis is that
by DiseasedBadger 8y ago
Your assumptions seem unlikely. There is no proof moral outrage is on the whole a good thing. No other species requires it.
The proper null hypothesis is that it does nothing.
- aaron695 8y agoWe know it hurts people on the end of the moral outrage so the default would be negative. We also know state actors are trying to use it to destabilize countries.
- saghm 8y ago> Your assumptions seem unlikely. There is no proof moral outrage is on the whole a good thing. No other species requires it. I don't see why that's a compelling argument; no other species requires written languages either, but I think on the whole it's been a pretty good investment for ours.
- jdsully 8y agoI see my dogs punish each other for benign behavior - just things they disagree with. It certainly appears to be a form of moral policing within the pack.