3 ms·

This is difficult because not everyone believes in the same ethics or follows the same laws. I think it's best to not assume my ethics are somehow more or less

This is difficult because not everyone believes in the same ethics or follows the same laws. I think it's best to not assume my ethics are somehow more or less valid than anyone else's. That said, I definitely agree that the law needs to change for these situations. It's tricky though, because the entire reason people create corporations is to avoid personal responsibility for their actions.

Ascetik 7y ago
>I think it's best to not assume my ethics are somehow more or less valid than anyone else's. That violates the law of non-contradiction. Either one is wrong and one is right, or both people are wrong and they haven't realized what is right yet. Moral subjectivism as a principle makes absolutely no sense, and Aristotle destroyed that argument in Nichomachean Ethics.
- leetcrew 7y ago
  what does it even mean for a moral system to be "right" or "wrong"? it's not like they have any predictive power.
- PopeDotNinja 7y ago
  Are you trolling? I can't tell.
  - Ascetik 7y ago
    No. People just have no concept of objective morality today because everyone is hyper-sensitive to everything and can't take criticism at all.
- dec0dedab0de 7y ago
  I simply meant that when I am initially appalled by someone else's behavior it is usually more useful to try to understand their point of view than it is to demonize them. I also try to remind myself that I always have room for improvement. Of course there are plenty of times where I can't excuse or even understand the bad actions of others. I'm just wary of anyone treating their personal morals as absolute.
kweinber 7y ago
There is a great new book describing ethical and moral stances and how one goes from moral absolutism to decency called “A Decent Life” by Todd May. Also, corporations allow you to avoid personal financial liability but not personal responsibility.... society and community still holds people accountable for social violations. People are also still accountable for criminal activity.

Ascetik 7y ago

>I think it's best to not assume my ethics are somehow more or less valid than anyone else's. That violates the law of non-contradiction. Either one is wrong and one is right, or both people are wrong and they haven't realized what is right yet. Moral subjectivism as a principle makes absolutely no sense, and Aristotle destroyed that argument in Nichomachean Ethics.

leetcrew 7y ago
what does it even mean for a moral system to be "right" or "wrong"? it's not like they have any predictive power.
PopeDotNinja 7y ago
Are you trolling? I can't tell.
- Ascetik 7y ago
  No. People just have no concept of objective morality today because everyone is hyper-sensitive to everything and can't take criticism at all.
dec0dedab0de 7y ago
I simply meant that when I am initially appalled by someone else's behavior it is usually more useful to try to understand their point of view than it is to demonize them. I also try to remind myself that I always have room for improvement. Of course there are plenty of times where I can't excuse or even understand the bad actions of others. I'm just wary of anyone treating their personal morals as absolute.

kweinber 7y ago

There is a great new book describing ethical and moral stances and how one goes from moral absolutism to decency called “A Decent Life” by Todd May. Also, corporations allow you to avoid personal financial liability but not personal responsibility.... society and community still holds people accountable for social violations. People are also still accountable for criminal activity.