= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
thomblake comments on Empirical claims, preference claims, and attitude claims - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (125)
Can you provide a citation? I was under the impression that legal killing is not considered murder, even if it is not legally justified. For example, a judge might sentence a criminal to death for unjust reasons, but that would not be considered murder, even though it could be a sort of wrongful death. Or is there a more technical sense of "legally justified" at play?
The criminal code defines things very explicitly, even though sometimes circularly. For example, the USC defines murder: "Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought.
The major distinction is from manslaughter: "Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice."
Manslaughter is defined in such a way as that it is not an act, but rather either the unintended result of negligence or a reaction which does not constitute a decision.
The moral sense of murder includes many things not included in the legal sense, such as the execution of an innocent person.