4 ms·

It is against the law, but I would wager it is morally coherent to smash them.

• delichon 5mo ago
  It's more coherent with moralities that put a relatively low value on property rights and rule of law.
  • eximius 5mo ago
    On both points, sure, trivially, if I do not value property or the rule of law, I will not care about destroying it. But obviously we're talking about the moral value of the implications more than the direct value of the camera. Do keep up. On the second point specifically, that's actually much more interesting! If one values the rule of law, then you would actually want your laws to be morally aligned! Otherwise, the conflict of the law with morality _devalues_ the rule of law. Valuing rule of law does not imply only some sort of legalistic value of laws unto themselves, but of the value of a society with good laws, enforced well. This incentivizes analysis and evolution _of the law_ and, to some degree, forcing conflict to bring about those changes.
    • deleted 5mo ago
      [deleted]
  • hackable_sand 5mo ago
    Well yes, not everyone plays make-believe all the time.
    • delichon 4mo ago
      That make believe game is civilization. It's nice to have.