this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2024

1198 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19222 readers

2427 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1198

Bernie Sanders to voters skipping presidential election over Israel: ‘Trump is even worse’ (www.nbcnews.com)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

666 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Your moral standards matter more than the lives of people

My moral standards are that peoples' lives are important, so killing them is wrong. That's why I don't accept that there is a good reason to bomb civilians.

My moral standards are not that you can say "well, killing people is wrong, but I prefer these people, so I will sacrifice others". If killing people is wrong, you do not accept sacrifice.

And my level of understanding of reality is that the trolley problem is a thought experiment which does not exist, and it's not a zero sum either/or game where the safety of people in America is only ensured by sacrificing people in the Middle East.

Source: medium

In 1976, Judith J. Thomson expanded the problem into the classic version that most of us know today.

Would you push a fat man off a bridge to stop a runaway trolley from killing 5 workers on the tracks?

This version is not just about switching tracks, but brings the moral issue much closer to home by saying if you want to save 5 people, you yourself have to push someone off a bridge.

To make matters worse, these are also the only two choices that you have. There is nothing else you can do; there is no escaping the problem.

[...]

Like many philosophy instructors, I have given this thought experiment to my students many times. In my philosophy classes, Students of all levels and ages are repulsed by the experiment. They think that it is stupid that there are only two choices and that there is nothing else they can do.

[...]

But something I have never seen given much consideration is the initial response that my students and so many others have to the problem.

[...]

Our intuition is that if we are in a lose-lose moral situation where the right moral action does not feel satisfactory, then someone else made a bad moral decision already; leaving us holding the bag.

You are free to dislike me because I don't rationalise myself into supporting something I, in the same sentence, say I do not agree with.
I am a very straightforward person, being autistic. If it is wrong to kill innocent people, it is wrong to kill innocent people. No amount of rationalising that can change that obvious fact.

You are a slave to a practical human world wherein, to be good, some humans must die. 'Le shrug, oh well, it is the price of being practical.'