3 ms·
I think we're too slow to call it malice sometimes, aren't we? If it doesn't look cartoonishly evil we ascribe it to other intentions, I mean. While it would be
by kzrdude 4y ago
I think we're too slow to call it malice sometimes, aren't we? If it doesn't look cartoonishly evil we ascribe it to other intentions, I mean. While it would be more bold to just call it evil, such as: evil by neglience, evil by greed, etc.
- gruez 4y ago>While it would be more bold to just call it evil, such as: evil by neglience, evil by greed, etc. It might be more bold right now, but the net effect of expanding words to mean stuff it didn't mean before is that words get even more watered down. If "evil" includes people acting negligently, what do you call people who were actually intentionally out to cause harm? Super-evil?
- kzrdude 4y agoThat's not what I wanted to say. It depends on the situation. Not all neglience is evil, of course not. Not all greed is evil, either.
- fortran77 4y agoI think there logic is the "but what about the children?" razor. "Save _one_ hytpothetical child, and it's all worth it" is one lemma derived from this principle.