Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

Re:Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart b... by nautilius on Wednesday January 26, 2022 @12:05AM (#30081964)

We're talking about the morality of the reaction, not about who imposes it. GP argues that it's morally fundamentally wrong to react to some else's 'misbehavior' by imposing the very same action as punishment.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart b... by vidarh on Wednesday January 26, 2022 @03:40AM (#30083190)

Graderjs comment does not say they are morally fundamentally wrong.

They say that the specific argument that life-taking is bad is undermined by arguing for life-taking.

This does not preclude other arguments for why life-taking may be bad, nor other arguments for why it may be justified in specific circumstances.

Note that graderjs' very own comment gives examples of other possible arguments for "eye for an eye":

> It will teach people a lesson, let them know they can't mess with us, and let them know there are consequences if they try. Hopefully, my ape brain says, that will make us safer and rest easier, in future.

As such it's very clear that graderjs is not making any sort of claim to absolute morality, but addressing the weakness of a specific line of argumentation.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart b... by graderjs on Wednesday January 26, 2022 @12:47AM (#30082239)

Well maybe not wrong fundamentally...but it calls into question your stance against the thing you end up doing.

[ Parent | on HN ]