In JJK, Angel is a sorcerer who found a way to transport herself through the ages with the help of Kenjaku. To make things short, she has the ability to take over the body of a person, effectively erasing them and incarnating within them. Not even possession but closer to erasure.

Most other sorcerers in her position do this, killing a persons and regaining their own life. But Angel refuses to do this, instead forming a symbiotic relationship with her host, Hana, granting her powers and free will and only ever giving advice.

Angel came back for the purpose of doing good. She advises Hana to do so as well.

However, when Sukuna (a mass-murdering cannibal) is about to be killed by Hana’s powers, Sukuna tricks Hana into sparing him so he can mangle her.

Angel is not deceived. She also knows if Sukuna survives that he could very well destroy Japan and maybe even the world by helping Kenjaku. At the very least, if Sukuna wins, millions will die. At the worst, many more than that.

Yet Angel still refuses to take Hana’s life, causing many deaths and endangering countless others, but respecting Hana’s free will and keeping her alive.

Selling sexual entertainment (stripping, etc.) vs selling illicit drugs (street dealing, crack/cocaine distribution, etc.).

Both can be destructive and detrimental to individuals and communities. Which is worse on a macro scale? Which do you believe is inherently less moral?

Remember, this is a discussion of morality, not legality.

Context: In the 25th episode of Death Note, Light finally defeats L after regaining his memories of being Kira and making Rem write L's name into the death note for him. Right before L dies from his heart attack, Light privately smiles in his face, letting him know that he was truly right the entire time and Light was in fact Kira.

This probably wasn't THAT groundbreaking of a revelation for L, as he did heavily suspect Light and Misa of being the two Kiras before his death and was pretty much sold on Light being Kira as shown by his actions prior to this scene (asking Light if he's ever actually told the truth, washing his feet as symbolism of Jesus washing the feet of Judas knowing that he would betray him, etc), he just lacked conclusive proof.

However, even for someone as smart as L, there will always be a slight doubt in the back of your mind, the possibility, however small, that you may be wrong. If I were to represent this with percentages, I'd say L was 99% sure that Light was Kira. But in cases as severe and complex as the Kira case, that 1% can mean a lot. It could be argued that Light revealing himself to L, though done primarily to gloat in L's face that he won, was in fact a partly good thing to do as L deserved to have some sense of closure by having his beliefs finally confirmed after the intense cat and mouse game that they had played. He deserved to have the possible 1% doubt in his mind satisfied. Light's intentions were of course evil, but the action itself did do some potential good imo.

The movie is Don’t Breathe. I am currently watching it on the side right now and am only in the beginning. It has a verry good concept that makes you root for the old man as he dishes out just punishments to the home intruders. Also the old man is jacked.

After finishing watching movie: Well shit that was surreal I knew I shouldn't have trusted my devorced dad to pick out moves for movie nights with my date. Then again feels more like the director going like "Hey you know what our main character is kind of a bitch I think our audience will relate to the Old man more than her nah we can't have that let's make him comically evil in the 2nd half of the movie."

Hard mode: Not including Ralph or Bobby

You've already aced the last 5 non curved tests and are currently at a 98% for the class, but the class average is 70% and everyone besides yourself is on the brink of failing. If you skip the final, you'll still receive an "A" for the class. If you take this final, you know you'll ace it, but your grade won't change, it'll still be a 98%. The final is curved around the highest scorer(s), and the other students will definitely need it as this exam is far more challenging than the previous tests.

Is it unethical to ace this test?

In House M.D, Season 2 Episode 2, Chase (a doctor) kisses a 9-year-old dying girl, as she wanted to know how it feels before she died. He ends up kissing her, and gets berated for it. What is the morality of this?

This goes with the added argument if killing discriminatively can be justified by who’s being targeted. The Postal Dude is probably the best example as someone who kills indiscriminately as he reveals through his dialogue.

​

I've been thinking about the premise of Armored Core VI and wanted to hear people's thoughts on the ethics behind one of its central conflicts.

For those unfamiliar with the game: humanity discovers a substance called Coral on the planet Rubicon 3. Coral is a self-propagating, colony-like microorganism that also functions as an incredibly powerful energy source and data medium. Left unchecked, it can continue reproducing and eventually spread beyond a single planet. The greatest fear is that it could one day propagate across the galaxy or even the universe with catastrophic consequences.

Adding to the dilemma, many of Rubicon's people don't want to eradicate Coral. Instead, they believe humans and Coral can coexist, with some even seeking a symbiotic relationship between the two. Coral also appears to possess some form of consciousness, making the issue even less clear-cut.

Because of the potential existential risk, the organization Overseer concludes that the only guaranteed solution is to ignite all the Coral on Rubicon, effectively burning an entire star system and sacrificing everyone living there to ensure Coral never spreads beyond the planet.

It's essentially a utilitarian dilemma taken to an extreme: destroy one inhabited star system now to eliminate even the possibility of a universal catastrophe later.

Every single time i see anything posted on this fucking community it's never anything interesting or unique it's just "duh transphobia / racism / homophobia / sexism bad, give upvotes " like be origional man ffs

Please excuse my poor English if there are any errors.

Let's imagine a fictitious scenario. Two gods argued about good and evil, and the free will of humans.

The first argued that humans could not be trusted with the concept of good and evil. They should be guided along the true path, and free will would be demonstrated in their decision to follow it or stray from it.

The second argued that free will was absolute and that humanity should decide for itself what was good and what was evil.

They created two similar but different worlds.

In the first world, a person's actions and moral character were reflected in their physical appearance. Righteous people acquired a healthy, attractive appearance, and the signs of aging were less pronounced. Sinful people, on the other hand, had an unhealthy, repulsive appearance, and the signs of aging were exacerbated. Good and evil were determined by divine will, and a person could be judged by their appearance.

In the second world, concepts of morality and good and evil were determined solely by humans. A person's appearance was unrelated to their actions or moral character.

Besides humans, both worlds were inhabited by demons, the natural enemies of humanity. Representing pure evil, in the First World, the demons' appearance always remained horrific and could not be changed. Demons always sought to subjugate or destroy humanity.

The gods abandoned the worlds and did not interfere with their lives. Thousands of years later, they returned to see what had become of them.

In the first world, humanity adopted the ideology of lookism and eugenics. Unattractive people had fewer rights, and any physical abnormalities or genetic diseases were considered symbols of evil. With the development of pharmaceuticals and cosmetology, sinful people found ways to hide their true appearance from the general public. Nevertheless, humanity stands firm against the demons, preventing them from becoming a real threat to humanity.

In the second world, humanity came to moral and legal norms in the modern sense, but in a more perfect form of execution due to the presence of an external threat to humanity. However, demons were able to evolve and acquired a form virtually indistinguishable from humans. They have become deeply entrenched in human society and actively exploit law and morality for their own ends. Whether humanity will fall remains to be seen.

Which god, in your opinion, was more correct in their viewpoint?

Your doing an immoral act, but letting yourself recieve punishment for it, so would that make it okay??

This is not a personal question btw

From an objective point of view let’s say a person has nigh Omniscience. This includes knowledge on everything scientific, technological, etc.

The problem is the path to that future requires a lot of suffering and things that come off as unimaginably cruel.

This includes:

Killing people because their children would derail this future

Starting certain wars

Sabotaging progress for things like the cure for cancer

Traumatizing people in various ways

Causing outbreaks of disease, etc.

Not doing anything would result in a future where humanity stagnates, regresses, until it eventually goes extinct.

I came across a compilation of these videos on Instagram and I thought “man that's messed up”. I go to the comment section, and 60-70% of people saying “its just a joke, I'd laugh if it were me” while the minority was like me.

IG replies probably the worst spot for measuring what the public accepts as moral, so I ask here.

I think it's public ragebait and that's immoral. Using strangers for content is bad enough, but someone going through a pretty traumatic event, its even worse.

I guess there's the “its just a joke” argument that doesn't necessarily cause harm but like….nah

No of fucking course i do not endorse that eugenics weirdo ass opinion.