3 ms·
You do believe you have a right because you do so contrary to law. You can frame your actions as moral and rationalize your lawbreaking all you want, but you’re
by ModernMech 4y ago
You do believe you have a right because you do so contrary to law. You can frame your actions as moral and rationalize your lawbreaking all you want, but you’re still breaking the law. Imagine if everyone acted this way? I can get metaphysical about all kinds of things I’d like to do contrary to the law, and create all kinds of rationalizations like “no one is hurt by my actions”. But that’s not quite true because if everyone acted in such a way, society would break down. At the end of the day it seems like you’re just rationalizing selfishness.
- cercatrova 4y agoYou're still conflating morality with legality. Piracy being illegal has no basis on whether it's moral. > Imagine if everyone acted this way? This is basically deontology by Immanuel Kant. Not everyone is a Kantian though, so this is why you see a clash of your personal ethics with those of non-Kantians. I don't think you're going to convince anyone through messages on HN (similarly those who are non-Kantians will not convince you, as you are seeing in your replies), just as I would not be able to convince an anti-abortionist about the opposite views. These ethical frameworks are so basal to our belief structures that if one disagree with someone else on these grounds, it is basically irreconcilable.
- happytoexplain 4y ago>Imagine if everyone acted this way? I imagine paid services may improve to compete. Regardless, the actual implication is fallacious. "One should only do what would cause no harm if every human did it" is not only unrealistic, but moot as long as not everybody is actually doing it. There's no intrinsic [im]morality in it.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]