I’m surprised you read moralism from what I said despite it being such an ostensibly immoral concept. Moralism would advocate for the Good Thing (tm), saving pe

I’m surprised you read moralism from what I said despite it being such an ostensibly immoral concept. Moralism would advocate for the Good Thing (tm), saving people, in other words. Im actually advocating more of a pragmatism take on the situation by saying that we’re all worse off having so many more people with uncontrollable impulses. And I really didn’t even touch on the implications of divorcing actions from consequences. Granted, this is a false dichotomy on a large enough time scale, unless you define morality as some specific set of beliefs rather than the more abstract “doing the right thing” I am of course criticizing the ignorant application of morality in general, but ironically truly utilitarian morality and pragmatism happen to coincide in this case