2 ms·

I understand that. My argument is that, practically, we're talking about the past actions of a certain individual within a certain legal context on a social sca

by dcow 4y ago

I understand that. My argument is that, practically, we're talking about the past actions of a certain individual within a certain legal context on a social scale where societal justice has already been served so you necessarily have to tie the two together otherwise society falls apart. What DPR did is not allowed by the laws of the land in which he did it. Therefore it is logical to assert that his actions are unwanted in that society. It's a bad idea to do illegal things and get caught. The semantics of it doesn't change the principle.

sneak 4y ago
> What DPR did is not allowed by the laws of the land in which he did it. Therefore it is logical to assert that his actions are unwanted in that society. I don't think that logically follows, either.
- dcow 4y ago
  It does because he committed a crime and is rotting in jail. That’s literally what that means. You can disagree forever about whether you specifically would accept his actions in some ideal society in your head, but that doesn't change reality. Simply, nobody is discussing the your imagination.
  - sneak 4y ago
    > It does because he committed a crime and is rotting in jail. That’s literally what that means. The fact that he is in jail, or that it is a crime, does not confirm nor disconfirm that society considers his alleged actions unwanted; as the law is not a perfect or even approximate representation of society's preferences. All it tells you is that it's illegal. It doesn't tell you whether or not society considers it unwanted. They are not congruent. There are literally thousands upon thousands of US federal felonies that society has no opinion whatsoever on. Oftentimes laws are passed with the involvement of only a handful of members of society. They are largely disconnected from the wants and views of the wider world.

2 ms·

I understand that. My argument is that, practically, we're talking about the past actions of a certain individual within a certain legal context on a social sca

by dcow 4y ago

sneak 4y ago
> What DPR did is not allowed by the laws of the land in which he did it. Therefore it is logical to assert that his actions are unwanted in that society. I don't think that logically follows, either.
- dcow 4y ago
  It does because he committed a crime and is rotting in jail. That’s literally what that means. You can disagree forever about whether you specifically would accept his actions in some ideal society in your head, but that doesn't change reality. Simply, nobody is discussing the your imagination.
  - sneak 4y ago
    > It does because he committed a crime and is rotting in jail. That’s literally what that means. The fact that he is in jail, or that it is a crime, does not confirm nor disconfirm that society considers his alleged actions unwanted; as the law is not a perfect or even approximate representation of society's preferences. All it tells you is that it's illegal. It doesn't tell you whether or not society considers it unwanted. They are not congruent. There are literally thousands upon thousands of US federal felonies that society has no opinion whatsoever on. Oftentimes laws are passed with the involvement of only a handful of members of society. They are largely disconnected from the wants and views of the wider world.