5 ms·

This argument cuts both ways. If Amazon isn't a moral entity, then there's also no moral violation if they screw you over.

by foldr 7y ago

tsbertalan 7y ago
Right, and it's not morally wrong for a mosquito to bite you, and no one would say that the bug "should have known better", but we do our best to prevent it anyway. Both entities will go precisely as far as we allow them to.
- foldr 7y ago
  When companies like Amazon do things that are morally wrong, you never see people making this claim that moral concepts don't apply to companies. They only say it when it's convenient for them (i.e., when they want to take advantage of Amazon rather than vice versa). To compare a company's actions to those of a mosquito strikes me as quite silly. Amazon is run by people who make conscious choices and who are responsible for their actions.
  - na85 7y ago
    >When companies like Amazon do things that are morally wrong, you never see people making this claim that moral concepts don't apply to companies. I see this all the time on HN.
  - Vraxx 7y ago
    Also, that comparison is made specifically because companies have no morality and so if we want them to behave in any sort of way approximating our morals, they must be regulated to do so. Those comments are advocating a change in the way companies are treated in order to get them to behave in a more expected manner.
    - foldr 7y ago
      I don't follow. People also need to be regulated in order to behave morally. Companies are run by people and it's entirely possible for companies to take moral stands or deliberately decide to do the right thing even when it's not the most profitable thing. It might not happen as often as we'd like, but it certainly does happen.
  - JetSpiegel 7y ago
    > When companies like Amazon do things that are morally wrong Companies don't "do things". The managers (and ultimately Bezos as the top manager) are the moral actors here. "Amazon" is just shortcut name for all the people that work there, this set is ever changing.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
tripzilch 7y ago
Yes, but it is undesirable. Which is why we have legal and financial incentives and regulations, to force corporations to behave.
EGreg 7y ago
What you will find, one day, is that morality is just the name we give to the system of similar humans dealing with one another. Everything else is attempts to extrapolate from that. Many things that are punished if an animal does to a human, are accepted by the billions if humans do to animals. Many times an adult has a responsibilty a child does not. The Amazon example is one of the latter kind. Besides morality there are legal systems. As you get more and more kinds of things, it is expedient to represent corporations as legal entities, but often they are held to a higher standard than just random people. Since a corporation can employ many people and machines, to prepare every sale, they are held to a higher standard for transactions, taxes, reporting, quality of product delivered, and so on. They also have deeper pockets and can take the hit.
- foldr 7y ago
  It's good to know that you've got morality all figured out :) I don't see any reason why it should be ok for people to knowingly rip Amazon off. There are worse things (by far) that someone can do, but there's no real justification for doing it.
darkarmani 7y ago
> This argument cuts both ways. If Amazon isn't a moral entity, then there's also no moral violation if they screw you over. In that case, it's not a moral violation if they screw you over, but it's not a moral violation if you end them for screwing you over either. The mosquito isn't violating morals when it bites me, but I'd still have no problem eliminating them all from my backyard if i could do it in a reasonable manner. Not many people claim it is immoral for me to swat the mosquito.
- foldr 7y ago
  Sure, maybe it's all about power and there's no real difference between right and wrong. I just don't see why that kind of nihilism suddenly becomes more plausible than usual when you're buying something from Amazon.

This argument cuts both ways. If Amazon isn't a moral entity, then there's also no moral violation if they screw you over.

by foldr 7y ago

This argument cuts both ways. If Amazon isn't a moral entity, then there's also no moral violation if they screw you over.

tsbertalan 7y ago

Right, and it's not morally wrong for a mosquito to bite you, and no one would say that the bug "should have known better", but we do our best to prevent it anyway. Both entities will go precisely as far as we allow them to.

foldr 7y ago
When companies like Amazon do things that are morally wrong, you never see people making this claim that moral concepts don't apply to companies. They only say it when it's convenient for them (i.e., when they want to take advantage of Amazon rather than vice versa). To compare a company's actions to those of a mosquito strikes me as quite silly. Amazon is run by people who make conscious choices and who are responsible for their actions.
- na85 7y ago
  >When companies like Amazon do things that are morally wrong, you never see people making this claim that moral concepts don't apply to companies. I see this all the time on HN.
- Vraxx 7y ago
  Also, that comparison is made specifically because companies have no morality and so if we want them to behave in any sort of way approximating our morals, they must be regulated to do so. Those comments are advocating a change in the way companies are treated in order to get them to behave in a more expected manner.
  - foldr 7y ago
    I don't follow. People also need to be regulated in order to behave morally. Companies are run by people and it's entirely possible for companies to take moral stands or deliberately decide to do the right thing even when it's not the most profitable thing. It might not happen as often as we'd like, but it certainly does happen.
- JetSpiegel 7y ago
  > When companies like Amazon do things that are morally wrong Companies don't "do things". The managers (and ultimately Bezos as the top manager) are the moral actors here. "Amazon" is just shortcut name for all the people that work there, this set is ever changing.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

tripzilch 7y ago

Yes, but it is undesirable. Which is why we have legal and financial incentives and regulations, to force corporations to behave.

EGreg 7y ago

What you will find, one day, is that morality is just the name we give to the system of similar humans dealing with one another. Everything else is attempts to extrapolate from that. Many things that are punished if an animal does to a human, are accepted by the billions if humans do to animals. Many times an adult has a responsibilty a child does not. The Amazon example is one of the latter kind. Besides morality there are legal systems. As you get more and more kinds of things, it is expedient to represent corporations as legal entities, but often they are held to a higher standard than just random people. Since a corporation can employ many people and machines, to prepare every sale, they are held to a higher standard for transactions, taxes, reporting, quality of product delivered, and so on. They also have deeper pockets and can take the hit.

foldr 7y ago
It's good to know that you've got morality all figured out :) I don't see any reason why it should be ok for people to knowingly rip Amazon off. There are worse things (by far) that someone can do, but there's no real justification for doing it.

darkarmani 7y ago

> This argument cuts both ways. If Amazon isn't a moral entity, then there's also no moral violation if they screw you over. In that case, it's not a moral violation if they screw you over, but it's not a moral violation if you end them for screwing you over either. The mosquito isn't violating morals when it bites me, but I'd still have no problem eliminating them all from my backyard if i could do it in a reasonable manner. Not many people claim it is immoral for me to swat the mosquito.

foldr 7y ago
Sure, maybe it's all about power and there's no real difference between right and wrong. I just don't see why that kind of nihilism suddenly becomes more plausible than usual when you're buying something from Amazon.