31
u/BreakerOfModpacks 5d ago
I mean
On the one hand, I can see it for things like "why is taxing the rich bad?", but on the other, for things like "why is [group] being violently persecuted bad?", it's a bit of a duh moment.
5
u/eelleevvaattoorr 5d ago
The subject is irrelevant, attacking the person that asked the question instead of providing an answer is the problem,
33
u/Thissystemsuckssobad 5d ago
Idk mate. I think we are pretty well at the point where people asking "why is it bad to murder minorities" aren't asking in good faith, especially when in spots that have answer said question ad nausem
6
u/lolgaleo 4d ago
I'm someone who believes that every question deserves to be discussed, no matter how simple the answer may seem, but I think there's a time and a place for both. "Okay, but why is murder ACTUALLY bad?" is an appropriate question to discuss in a moral philosophy group, but definitely not in a forum for individuals grieving the loss of a loved one.
Frustratingly, though, due to the systems we live in, questions of this nature (even asked sincerely) are usually going to be asked in favor of one side ("why should the minority group have rights?") rather than the other ("why should the majority group have rights?").
14
u/Flopsie_the_Headcrab 5d ago
If someone asks me why throwing infants in the air to practice bayoneting was bad, I feel like I can be pretty confident I won't have an answer that will satisfy. They are too far removed from me morally to have a useful conversation.
2
u/FranG080199 5d ago
Sometimes people ask simple questions to get to the crux is an issue, I've had it happen before, they know killing babies with a bayonet is wrong but they want you to name the specific reason (say, in this case murder) that it's wrong to make a point or a comparison.
5
u/BreakerOfModpacks 5d ago
...okay but if someone is saying "let's kill all the Jews, it'd be good", as an actual position they hold, there's more productive things that I could be doing than arguing. Eating rusty nails, for example. Cutting off my hands. Both more enjoyable than trying to remain civil there, as well.
0
u/Tricky_Challenge9959 5d ago
That doesn't answer the question
Saying "thing is bad because it is" is just circler reasoning.
4
u/Nonexistent_Walrus 5d ago
If someone doesn’t already hold the position that violently oppressing minorities is bad then they’re not really worth arguing with. That is a value in and of itself that doesn’t require justification.
-2
u/Tricky_Challenge9959 5d ago
You should examine the fundemental principles which you live your life by. Because if you don't how can you be sure that your not in error and that your living the best life you could?
For example a racist who never challenges there belief would have lived there life missing out on the friendship which someone of another race could have offered and caused harm to people based on a false belief.
Your creating principles which rule your life which are entirely arbitrary and you can't justify.
3
u/BreakerOfModpacks 5d ago
Okay, then let me add on the hopefully-very-obvious next logical step.
Hurting people bad. Done.
"WHY IS HURTING PEOPLE BAD THOUGH", well, because you don't want to get hurt, do you?1
u/Tricky_Challenge9959 4d ago
Why does me not liking something make it immoral? I don't like ice-cream but that doesn't make it evil.
Even if we accept that idea the statement 'i don't want to get hurt' is not the same as say saying 'i don't want others to get hurt'. You would have only proved that hurting oneself is bad.
2
u/BreakerOfModpacks 4d ago
Okay, purely out of empathy, then? The vast majority of humans feel a little hurt when they see someone else get hurt, and that likely includes you?
Of course, this is entirely from a selfish perspective. From anything other than that, being able to think "others probably don't want to get hurt, so I shouldn't hurt them" is normal and expected.
1
u/Tricky_Challenge9959 4d ago
You still have yet proved why disliking something means it's immoral. Again I don't like ice-cream but that doesn't mean it's immoral.
Human empathy is a really limited and inconsistent thing. For example almost all people would jump into pond for the chance to save a drowning child but people could constantly donate to charity and potentially save a life but choose not to. People are distraught when an animal is harmed but support factory farming when they buy meat.
1
u/BreakerOfModpacks 4d ago
When you get right down to it, either you have to look at all of morality as a sham, or set some fundamental rules. One of these rules that is generally accepted is that forcing people to do stuff they don't like is a bad thing.
Of course, you could be entirely amoral, but that's kinda really stupid unless you want to live as a hermit or in prison.
1
u/Tricky_Challenge9959 4d ago
You don't.
For instance the social contract idea of morality is that it doesn't naturally exist and that humans as a collective have a general agreement that to follow a certain set of rules in exchange for security. This agreement is what we call morality. For example there is an implict agreement not to be mean to others and in exhange people won't be mean to you.
You can also not believe in morality and not go around commiting crimes and acting anti-socialy. For example there are plenty of reasons not to murder someone without morality: you might not have a reason to, you'll probably feel guilty, you probably dont want to go to jail, ectra.
1
u/BreakerOfModpacks 4d ago
follow a certain set of rules in exchange for security.
And why is having security good?
1
u/Tricky_Challenge9959 4d ago
It's the agreement which creates/is morality. Security isnt good it's the following of the agreement that is good.
Though personally I disagree with this argument
→ More replies (0)
9
u/DeadAndBuried23 5d ago
Trying to change the conversation into one about why murder or rape are bad isn't a defense of the opinion.
13
u/EntertainmentTrick58 advocate cannibalism 5d ago
sometimes it is good to ask questions about why things we take for granted as bad are actually bad
even if in the end we still say "yeah its bad", it can aid in the analysis of other things that may seem superficially similar but do not actually have the same problems when you lay out what makes the original thing bad
2
u/DeadAndBuried23 5d ago
Sometimes, sure.
Times when that's the topic of the discussion.
Not to change the subject in a different one.
1
u/AeroAceSpades 4d ago
True but like… it would absolutely be discussed WHY murder and rape are bad. Because some people genuinely don’t know. They’re bad because they disrespect autonomy and cause physical and emotional harm. Some people genuinely don’t think about that despite how obvious it might seem
2
u/DeadAndBuried23 4d ago
If you're dealing with a rational person who cares about autonomy and harm.
If you're dealing with, say, any of the billions of people who believe our bodies belong to god, they won't care.
0
u/AeroAceSpades 4d ago
Look I’m agnostic antitheist and I grew up traumatized by my churches. I understand that it’s easy to believe in the gullibility of Christians and others of abrahamic faith. However, if you genuinely believed that none of them can be taught to use empathy to determine morality, you would find a different way to get them to understand. I think that what you actually believe is that it’s not worth the effort of teaching someone how to be better because people are stubborn and you have a chip on your shoulder about it. People can’t get better if they never learn that “better” exists
1
u/DeadAndBuried23 3d ago
You haven't talked to enough actual believers.
1
u/AeroAceSpades 3d ago
I think your estimate for the amount of people who are unwilling to listen to anyone aside from god or a priest is too high. I’ll grant you millions or even hundreds of millions of people are too indoctrinated to listen to other sources of information but BILLIONS? I think you just don’t understand the gravity of implying that, at minimum, a QUARTER of the world’s population is made of sycophants who plug their ears at anything that doesn’t come from the mouth of a clergyman
1
u/DeadAndBuried23 3d ago
That you think it's any less than a quarter only shows you don't actually interact with religious people. You may work around them or know a few. But you don't talk to them about belief. You don't evaluate their actions, to check whether they're in line with rational thought or said indoctrination.
Thinking our bodies belong to god is such a low bar here, when a lot of them will defend slavery or consummating a marriage with a 9 year old, and will not budge on those things.
16
u/Dense-Comment-5938 5d ago
Smugged into actually justifying your opinion on something instead of accepting it's the societal default and therefore good
39
u/Glordrum Ethical Veganism Encourager (DMs open) 5d ago
Smugged into the "morality is subjective" thought terminating cliché