4 ms·
that's post-hoc rationalization. we came to see blacks as humans because lots of people shed blood and fought for their rights. nothing was handed to anyone fo
by perfmode 7y ago
that's post-hoc rationalization.
we came to see blacks as humans because lots of people shed blood and fought for their rights. nothing was handed to anyone for free.
- toasterlovin 7y agoSo you'd find no moral fault in a person who chose to save a dog instead of a human?
- perfmode 7y agoIt is disappointing to observe you argue so strongly from a position of deep and profound ignorance on this topic. have you no doubt? Recommended reading: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-animal/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-animal/
- toasterlovin 7y agoWhy would I be persuaded to change my mind when you A) won't answer a simple question, and B) think it's reasonable to take the position that I am wrong because I won't spend several hours digesting some link you've provided, which you can't be bothered to spend three sentences summarizing? My premise is simple: almost every single person would find a person who chose to save the life of an animal over a human morally culpable for the death of the human. Whereas they would not find a person morally culpable for the death of the animal if they chose to save the person instead. That asymmetry directly speaks to the different moral stations that animals and humans occupy. You have yet to level a single actual argument against that premise.
- perfmode 7y agoI am not responsible for your education. Take responsibility for yourself and have a nice life.