5 ms·
> I think regardless of the specifics, using <compound noun> to manipulate people into gambling is predatory and immoral... Fixed this for you bro
by 8338550bff96 3y ago
> I think regardless of the specifics, using <compound noun> to manipulate people into gambling is predatory and immoral...
Fixed this for you bro
- vouaobrasil 3y agoOkay, so that means these two sentences are the same: "It is very immoral to stab someone with a knife." "It is very immoral to kill a billion people with a bomb." And we should treat these situations with the same attention. Whatever happened to considering magnitude?
- Aerroon 3y agoAren't they equivalent in terms of morality? If they aren't, then you've basically answered the Trolley Problem by implying that the outcome with more deaths is morally worse. Magnitude is a question of pragmatism. I don't think pragmatism is very popular among people when looking at things like the war on drugs (despite so many people being against it, nothing has changed).
- 8338550bff96 3y agoWhy are you using sentences other than the template that I showed? The outcome for "It is very immoral to stab someone with a knife." and "It is very immoral to kill a billion people with a bomb." is very different in scale and kind. What I highlighted is that the means by which a common objective is reached is irrelevant when the objective is inherently immoral. I hope this helps you understand how language works.
- vouaobrasil 3y ago> What I highlighted is that the means by which a common objective is reached is irrelevant when the objective is inherently immoral. I disagree completely if after the initial objective is reached, the means then propagates the reaching of further objectives that are also immoral. And the more advanced the technology, the more immoral means will be reached.
- hackable_sand 3y agoThe trolley problem is the *real* threat here.