3 ms·
Definitely. In most societies you don't get the pure "if it doesn't harm others" but already something more like "if it isn't too likely to harm others too much
by RandomLensman 3y ago
Definitely. In most societies you don't get the pure "if it doesn't harm others" but already something more like "if it isn't too likely to harm others too much" (with all sorts of intricacies and local flavors).
- swader999 3y agoThe "don't harm others" is very complex, multi layered, contextual and so on. This is why looser restrictions on the discussion, debate and even thought are needed. Note, I said "others", I think there should be the ability to make choices that harm ourselves. We benefit from taking bad paths and learning from them. I don't know how else one can truly grow.
- Nevermark 3y ago> We benefit from taking bad paths and learning from them. Up to a point. Nothing is simple. Systematic net-negative transactions are worth inhibiting if not prohibiting. For instance, predatory lenders that knowingly put disadvantaged people in moments of dire need on a long road of financial slavery, and inevitable bankruptcy, are a cancer.