3 ms·

Is your argument that Thiel is arguing for murder, in a roundabout way? Can you give an example of that?

• Teever 4y ago
  It's not my argument, it's the argument of the person I'm responding to. > Some of you reading this are going to huff and just disregard it, but for Thiel, preventing potential massive tragedy in the future is likely worth a tradeoff of some people being "harmed" now. What I'm asking is how many degrees of separation is needed to make what OP is saying Thiel is doing acceptable.
  • defen 4y ago
    As far as I can tell, "harmed" is in quotes because the so-called harm would not even have been recognized as such in previous generations (unless you can provide counterexamples)
    • Teever 4y ago
      That doesn't make sense because the hypothetical alternative that Thiel is trying to prevent an atrocity by conducting less of atrocity. It's a the needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few argument. If there wasn't something substantial on the table we wouldn't be having this discussion.