Bidah@thelemmy.club to Asklemmy@lemmy.ml · 5 days agoWhat do you think about the concept of lesser evil? (i.e. when faced with selecting from two immoral options, the less immoral one should be chosen.)message-squaremessage-square125fedilinkarrow-up159arrow-down14
arrow-up155arrow-down1message-squareWhat do you think about the concept of lesser evil? (i.e. when faced with selecting from two immoral options, the less immoral one should be chosen.)Bidah@thelemmy.club to Asklemmy@lemmy.ml · 5 days agomessage-square125fedilink
minus-squareDagwoodIII@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·4 days agoMy father is going to beat up my mom if he finds out that she took his drug money to buy food. Are you saying I shouldn’t lie? That it’s more important to tell the truth than to protect my mom from a beating?
minus-squareℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·4 days agoFalse dichotomy, those aren’t your only choices. Further, lying isn’t automatically wrong. Deceiving or otherwise inhibiting a hostile, evil entity is virtuous.
minus-squareDagwoodIII@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·4 days ago“Lying isn’t automatically wrong.” Thanks for making my point for me.
minus-squareℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·4 days agoYour point remains unmade. If it was a defense of moral relativism, the arguments don’t support the conclusion. If it was something else, I’ve no idea what you’re trying to say.
minus-squareDagwoodIII@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down2·4 days agoOf course you don’t understand because I’m not using your approved lingo. I had a good laugh watching you go from trying to use plain language, and then jumping to ‘moral relativism.’
minus-squareℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·4 days agoI’m sorry, did you need me to keep talking like you’re five?
minus-squareDagwoodIII@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down2·4 days agoLaughing harder now. You are unable to articulate your position without resorting to lingo, then try to cover up with a lame joke. You’ve proven my point twice. First that ‘the lesser evil’ is a valid option and then when you showed you were dependent on lingo to make your points. Let me know what part of that you fail to understand.
My father is going to beat up my mom if he finds out that she took his drug money to buy food.
Are you saying I shouldn’t lie? That it’s more important to tell the truth than to protect my mom from a beating?
False dichotomy, those aren’t your only choices.
Further, lying isn’t automatically wrong. Deceiving or otherwise inhibiting a hostile, evil entity is virtuous.
“Lying isn’t automatically wrong.”
Thanks for making my point for me.
Your point remains unmade. If it was a defense of moral relativism, the arguments don’t support the conclusion. If it was something else, I’ve no idea what you’re trying to say.
Of course you don’t understand because I’m not using your approved lingo.
I had a good laugh watching you go from trying to use plain language, and then jumping to ‘moral relativism.’
I’m sorry, did you need me to keep talking like you’re five?
Laughing harder now.
You are unable to articulate your position without resorting to lingo, then try to cover up with a lame joke.
You’ve proven my point twice. First that ‘the lesser evil’ is a valid option and then when you showed you were dependent on lingo to make your points.
Let me know what part of that you fail to understand.