= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
joeteicher comments on Suffering - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (92)
Did the majority of people living at the time feel like it was okay? Is it okay for you to second guess the judgement of thoughtful people who understood the context way better than anyone does now?
If at some point most people believe that killing mammals for food is monstrous, and it is banned, and children learn with horror about 21st century practices of murdering and devouring millions of cows and pigs each year, will that make it wrong to eat a hamburger now? Will eating a hamburger now be okay if that never happens? I certainly don't feel that the moral value of my actions should depend on the beliefs of people living hundreds of years in the future.
Moral realism fallacy alert?
Yes, that will make it wrong in their view. There's no law of nature that says different people from different times should have identical moral judgements.
No, the moral value of your actions in your view doesn't have to depend on their beliefs. There's no law of nature that says different people from different times should have identical moral judgements.
Ha! Nice to see we have this one covered from both sides.
Are you defending some kind of temporal moral relativism here?
Don't worry, you have it backwards. The moral value of your actions is not determined by the beliefs of any people, but rather the people's beliefs are an attempt to track the facts about the moral value of your actions (assuming there is such a thing at all).