3 ms·

reading the news shouldn't be trying to make moral judgements in countries half a world away How should we make moral judgments about what’s going on in the wo

by p1esk 5y ago

reading the news shouldn't be trying to make moral judgements in countries half a world away How should we make moral judgments about what’s going on in the world? How is deciding to be a dumb service in a country when clearly innocent people are dying as a result of official actions of that country not a moral judgment? Or should we just not care?

roenxi 5y ago
> How is deciding to be a dumb service in a country when clearly innocent people are dying as a result of official actions of that country not a moral judgment? Because it is a position that fundamentally says "I don't know how reliable this information is". Obviously if we took news at face value then it would be necessary to approach the world very differently than people do. But the media lies/is wrong/works to sway consensus/doesn't uncover the most important issues/are only human and so it would be stupid to respond to everything that gets reported. There hasn't been a crisis in my lifetime where the consensus position 10 days in was useful for making good decisions. People were still saying COVID wasn't human transmissible and laughing at peppers at this point, for example. Or Iraq, my go-to comparison, where people were convinced Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. The news coming out about the Russia/Ukraine war is unreliable no matter how much people think that this time it will be an open and shut case. At some point people have to bow to overwhelming evidence that even though every single time it looks like this time is different, it probably isn't different. The reliable information here is that Russia has invaded the Ukraine. That isn't enough reason for businesses to start throwing out random punitive mini-sanctions. We've seen a lot of invasions over history and that isn't a usual or useful response.
- p1esk 5y ago
  If you are not sure what’s going on, then yes, I agree with you. But what if you’re sure? Personally I have received enough information to be sure about what’s happening there. Maybe the Spotify’s CEO feels the same way you do. But if not - he should make a moral judgment and prioritize that over profits. This is what great men do.
  - roenxi 5y ago
    Sure about what? At any given time it is normal for the US to be engaged in active invasion or occupation of multiple countries. Nobody is calling for Spotify to boycott US propaganda. The parts we can be sure of don't justify anything other than business as usual. Which is typical.
    - p1esk 5y ago
      Agree to disagree.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
just-ok 5y ago
Honestly? You shouldn't. There is so much we aren't privy to, and today's 240-character news cycle is full of rumor, hearsay, and lies, so any opinion or judgement formed is almost guaranteed to be flawed.

by p1esk 5y ago

roenxi 5y ago

> How is deciding to be a dumb service in a country when clearly innocent people are dying as a result of official actions of that country not a moral judgment? Because it is a position that fundamentally says "I don't know how reliable this information is". Obviously if we took news at face value then it would be necessary to approach the world very differently than people do. But the media lies/is wrong/works to sway consensus/doesn't uncover the most important issues/are only human and so it would be stupid to respond to everything that gets reported. There hasn't been a crisis in my lifetime where the consensus position 10 days in was useful for making good decisions. People were still saying COVID wasn't human transmissible and laughing at peppers at this point, for example. Or Iraq, my go-to comparison, where people were convinced Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. The news coming out about the Russia/Ukraine war is unreliable no matter how much people think that this time it will be an open and shut case. At some point people have to bow to overwhelming evidence that even though every single time it looks like this time is different, it probably isn't different. The reliable information here is that Russia has invaded the Ukraine. That isn't enough reason for businesses to start throwing out random punitive mini-sanctions. We've seen a lot of invasions over history and that isn't a usual or useful response.

p1esk 5y ago
If you are not sure what’s going on, then yes, I agree with you. But what if you’re sure? Personally I have received enough information to be sure about what’s happening there. Maybe the Spotify’s CEO feels the same way you do. But if not - he should make a moral judgment and prioritize that over profits. This is what great men do.
- roenxi 5y ago
  Sure about what? At any given time it is normal for the US to be engaged in active invasion or occupation of multiple countries. Nobody is calling for Spotify to boycott US propaganda. The parts we can be sure of don't justify anything other than business as usual. Which is typical.
  - p1esk 5y ago
    Agree to disagree.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

just-ok 5y ago

Honestly? You shouldn't. There is so much we aren't privy to, and today's 240-character news cycle is full of rumor, hearsay, and lies, so any opinion or judgement formed is almost guaranteed to be flawed.