4 ms·

It’s unethical to -certainly- cause harm. This is such a banal thing to say. By that logic existing in the contemporary world is unethical. At that point who c

It’s unethical to -certainly- cause harm. This is such a banal thing to say. By that logic existing in the contemporary world is unethical. At that point who cares about ethics? Ethics to me is fundamentally about improving life not some nonsense sophist rhetoric.

kanox 6y ago
> It’s unethical to -certainly- cause harm. A much better standard is to claim that "it's unethical to cause harm in order to study the harm done". We don't expose people to radiation in order to study radiation poisoning, not even in order to research treatment. We do however accept that some people might be exposed to radiation as part of their jobs or for medical treatments, and the harm caused by this exposure can be studied.
- ndndkdofofi 6y ago
  Is your better standard much better? It is unethical to cause harm in order to study the harm done but it is not unethical to cause harm in order to study something that is not the harm done? If not why even make the distinction to begin with?
  - nkingsy 6y ago
    I think the parent's example is pretty clear. If there were two medical treatments available, both had similar help/harm trade offs, but one caused harm that was "more useful for science", this should not be a factor in the recommendation given by the health care professional.
  - sunopener 6y ago
    Life improves all on its own if you leave it alone. By the time ethics and morals are the center of attention, the way has already been lost. Ethics are a product of wrongthink, a capitalist packaging of systemic poison originating from the narrative that your so-called "freedom" is up for sale. Ethics thereby become the means by which to subjugate people and their power of thought, i.e. you and your mind, as a CUSTOM(export) in of itself. The poison is the belief of the promise of the ethic, the promise of the character, or the ethos disregarding the logos and the pathos, which is utilized to persuade large swaths of people and encourages the formation of public and counterpublics which creates a positive feedback loop especially with the structures of "safe spaces" or echo chambers with which to amplify the psuedo-appearance of a prolific environment by which many material goods become available (t-shirts, mugs, stickers, swag, books, etc. -- whatever is the "fashion" of era) in return for a parasitic-like colonization in the minds of human beings, but really it's more akin to the Ouroboros, an "Ethical Ouroboros". Of course, to break the cycle, the dragon must spit out the Tail it is devouring, realize the tale being fed was simply a grand story of much harm and suffering, shadows on the cave walls of a fever dream, abandon the attitudes of self-annihilation, and move beyond the realm of the known into the fearsome great unknown where ethics has yet to be blown into a giant red balloon full of helium gas known as Penny-wise.

kanox 6y ago

> It’s unethical to -certainly- cause harm. A much better standard is to claim that "it's unethical to cause harm in order to study the harm done". We don't expose people to radiation in order to study radiation poisoning, not even in order to research treatment. We do however accept that some people might be exposed to radiation as part of their jobs or for medical treatments, and the harm caused by this exposure can be studied.

ndndkdofofi 6y ago
Is your better standard much better? It is unethical to cause harm in order to study the harm done but it is not unethical to cause harm in order to study something that is not the harm done? If not why even make the distinction to begin with?
- nkingsy 6y ago
  I think the parent's example is pretty clear. If there were two medical treatments available, both had similar help/harm trade offs, but one caused harm that was "more useful for science", this should not be a factor in the recommendation given by the health care professional.
- sunopener 6y ago
  Life improves all on its own if you leave it alone. By the time ethics and morals are the center of attention, the way has already been lost. Ethics are a product of wrongthink, a capitalist packaging of systemic poison originating from the narrative that your so-called "freedom" is up for sale. Ethics thereby become the means by which to subjugate people and their power of thought, i.e. you and your mind, as a CUSTOM(export) in of itself. The poison is the belief of the promise of the ethic, the promise of the character, or the ethos disregarding the logos and the pathos, which is utilized to persuade large swaths of people and encourages the formation of public and counterpublics which creates a positive feedback loop especially with the structures of "safe spaces" or echo chambers with which to amplify the psuedo-appearance of a prolific environment by which many material goods become available (t-shirts, mugs, stickers, swag, books, etc. -- whatever is the "fashion" of era) in return for a parasitic-like colonization in the minds of human beings, but really it's more akin to the Ouroboros, an "Ethical Ouroboros". Of course, to break the cycle, the dragon must spit out the Tail it is devouring, realize the tale being fed was simply a grand story of much harm and suffering, shadows on the cave walls of a fever dream, abandon the attitudes of self-annihilation, and move beyond the realm of the known into the fearsome great unknown where ethics has yet to be blown into a giant red balloon full of helium gas known as Penny-wise.