4 ms·
Invariably big companies are causing some harm as a side-effect of their business. They’d usually be better off if their business didn’t cause this harm. This m
by fshbbdssbbgdd 5y ago
Invariably big companies are causing some harm as a side-effect of their business. They’d usually be better off if their business didn’t cause this harm. This means they employ people whose entire job is to reduce the harm. If your goal is to make the world a better place, these roles can be a good opportunity to do that given the scale involved. From a utilitarian perspective, it’s easy to argue that a person in that position is doing more good than most people in the world.
On the other hand, if someone is just trying to make the most money, they may end up causing harm. There are many jobs like that - but the scale is more at bigger companies.
I don’t think it makes sense to judge someone based on the company they work for if you don’t actually know whether that individual’s actions are making the world a better place or a worse place.
- rand846633 5y agoWhy would you judge someone purely for their individual actions and not for the action of the group they are actively contributing and thereby enabling? If you are, let’s say the boat mechanic of someone making a business of dumping toxic chemicals in the sea, then you are clearly doing evil. Similarly, if you are doing “harm reduction” at Facebook, you are still enabling them to exist, thereby enabling them to get away with doing more harm overall.
- jseban 5y agoHaha there are crackpots in moral philosophy too, not only physics
- fshbbdssbbgdd 5y agoCapitalism is destructive, America is destructive. There’s valid arguments to remove yourself from the system or work within it to make it better.