zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. Nutmog+(OP)[view] [source] 2016-01-06 11:00:07
Many groups agree within themselves. But they disagree with other groups. Who can judge which group it right? What are the odds that it happens to be the group you're in, not all the others that previous generations were in or people in other cultures are in.

Quick test - is looking at a photo of a naked child evil?

replies(1): >>Laaw+z51
2. Laaw+z51[view] [source] 2016-01-06 21:38:31
>>Nutmog+(OP)
Quicker test - do you have a point, or are you just trying to bog down this conversation about privacy with a defeatist "we have to let murders/rapists get away with it" argument?
replies(1): >>Nutmog+Xl6
◧◩
3. Nutmog+Xl6[view] [source] [discussion] 2016-01-10 04:56:52
>>Laaw+z51
I'm concerned that you seem to have made a clear distinction between good and evil when really there is none. Certainly we can apply our own society's general ideas, but it's not black and white in any way. Even murder is acceptable in many cultures. For example killing of soldiers during a war.
replies(1): >>Laaw+527
◧◩◪
4. Laaw+527[view] [source] [discussion] 2016-01-10 19:51:08
>>Nutmog+Xl6
It's a placeholder, and talking about it is distracting from the point (the "point" being maybe we can have both privacy and safety, and that the dichotomy is false). There is undeniably some activity that we can both agree is evil, and therefore we can talk about Evil without having to figure out exactly what that activity is.

Or rather, we could if you were being intellectually honest.

Most people, if given the choice, will nearly always pick safety over privacy. It's simply not enough to say you can't have both, because privacy will eventually get thrown out by the electorate, of any country.

[go to top]