3 ms·
It certainly is a bizarre argument. With absolution of guilt for wrongly held beliefs, one could engage in deplorable actions without a tinge of later guilt. W
by dleslie 5y ago
It certainly is a bizarre argument. With absolution of guilt for wrongly held beliefs, one could engage in deplorable actions without a tinge of later guilt.
We all have a responsibility to question our beliefs, and what harm our actions cause.
- marnett 5y agoYes we do have that responsibility and obligation. Reading his fallacious defense had me immediately thinking of the essay “The Ethics of Belief”[0]. [0] http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/Clifford_ethics.pdf http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/Clifford_ethics.pdf
- FpUser 5y ago>"We all have a responsibility to question our beliefs, and what harm our actions cause." Can you point me to any source that spells it in legal terms in relation to general public (not specific cases like food inspector)? Like some written law. Also if existed think of what would such law would to to politicians unless they're specifically exempt.
- dleslie 5y agoLaws are not always rules for ethical behaviour, let alone the authoritative rules for ethical behaviour.