Vuraniute to Memes@lemmy.mlEnglish • 2 years agofixed cyberghost's "meme"thelemmy.clubimagemessage-square836fedilinkarrow-up11Karrow-down10
arrow-up11Karrow-down1imagefixed cyberghost's "meme"thelemmy.clubVuraniute to Memes@lemmy.mlEnglish • 2 years agomessage-square836fedilink
minus-squareBurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]linkfedilinkEnglish17•2 years agoWhat makes it morally justifiable in this case but not others?
minus-square@JohnDClay@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilink4•2 years agoThat it is benefiting those involved instead of being to their determent.
minus-squareBurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]linkfedilinkEnglish16•2 years agoIs benefiting others morally justifiable?
minus-squareBurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]linkfedilinkEnglish17•2 years agoWhat is the moral justification for your answer?
minus-square@JohnDClay@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilink4•2 years agoIt’s actually axiomatic. I can’t really prove or justify why one should be good or bad, or why they should be good or bad to one another. But that good is good and to be strived for is the staring point of the philosophy.
minus-squareBurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]linkfedilinkEnglish17•2 years agoThis is an appeal to the one true scotsman fallacy
minus-square@JohnDClay@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilink3•2 years agoLook up axioms. You’ll see they are the staring points of logical arguments.
Not always but in this case
What makes it morally justifiable in this case but not others?
That it is benefiting those involved instead of being to their determent.
Is benefiting others morally justifiable?
Yes
What is the moral justification for your answer?
It’s actually axiomatic. I can’t really prove or justify why one should be good or bad, or why they should be good or bad to one another. But that good is good and to be strived for is the staring point of the philosophy.
This is an appeal to the one true scotsman fallacy
Look up axioms. You’ll see they are the staring points of logical arguments.