Post #2117444

2026-04-24 19:39 UTC

... Yes... Any discussion on an ethical way to do something, is first predicted on the thing happening. There's an ethical way to cut aomeone's leg off, that doesn't mean we should cut Bob's leg off, it doesn't even mean we should cut anyone's leg off under any circumstances. Just that if we were going to do something, there are ways to do that ethically. People really don't learn this shit anymore?

Replies (2)

@nwtreeoctopus@sh.itjust.works 2026-04-24 21:37

On the other hand, there're good, ethical reasons to cut off Bob's leg sometimes. If you hold the view that there's never an ethical reason for the state to execute someone, then by that definition all those killings are just some varied degrees of unethical.

Open ##2117447
@sulfidedisburseangledafternoontipper@piefed.blahaj.zone 2026-04-24 23:10

This argument is specious. It implies that there's an ethical way to engage in any imaginable act and ignores the possibility of the existence of acts which may never be ethical under any circumstance. This isn't a question of whether someone has "learned this shit." You've created a tautology re: the existence of an ethical means to all ends. One doesn't need to accept Kant's Categorical Imperative to believe that some acts can never be ethical.

Open ##2117448