3 ms·

[flagged]

• satisfice 2y ago
  Seems like the first thing one needs to do before criticizing something is to have a solid philosophical basis for doing so. Therefore, we should just open this dusty cupboard labeled “moral ideas philosophers agree about and…” oh my god…
• rramadass 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • snapplebobapple 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • rramadass 2y ago
      [flagged]
      • snapplebobapple 2y ago
        [flagged]
        • 6510 2y ago
          I had never heard of colonial apologists but you've dressed up the stereotype quite nicely. If my great grandfather took your great grandfather bicycle I get to tell you that it was because your great grandfather was a poor cyclist. You in turn get to disagree with me. We might debate but it wont change that I have the bicycle now and I'm not giving it back. And then we can confuse the example for the subject. The point of the exercise was to get along. We are building a model for future application. I'm struggling to resist the urge to provide some modern examples. What is this making people liable for their own debts you speak of? Surely this only applies to the peasants and even then rarely? Punishments wont convince you you've done something wrong. You have to tell right from wrong all by yourself while others get to set the wrong example.
        • rramadass 2y ago
          [flagged]