Comments | sirenspull: Text; In which everyone hates scenarios

mindf_cks in sirenspull

Text; In which everyone hates scenarios

Nov 03, 2010 15:51

A small girl is playing on a swing in a local playground when an adult comes along and pushes her off into the dirt for no other reason than that he'd had a bad day at work and wanted to take it out on somebody who couldn't fight back. Are his actions morally wrong?

(( There's going to be a bazillion scenarios following this, I apologize. AANNNDD ( Read more... )

c: asano rin, †: alphonse elric, !: scarecrow, c: hyuuga neji, c: grell sutcliff, c: deathstroke the terminator, c: magneto, c: nara shikamaru, †: yagami raito, †: poison ivy, †: viral, c: franziska von karma, c: sherlock holmes, †: claire bennet, c: hope estheim

Comments 433

[text as long as I have this font XD] escapedpandora November 3 2010, 22:54:09 UTC

Of course it is!

[text :> same!] mindf_cks November 3 2010, 22:58:45 UTC

I see.

Is it possible for an action to be morally wrong solely because people find the idea of it a bit disgusting? For example, if lots of people found the idea of eating porridge disgusting, could it be morally wrong to eat porridge just for this reason and no other reason?

Re: [text :> same!] escapedpandora November 3 2010, 23:03:41 UTC

If people want to eat porridge, it's their choice, right? I agree there are things that shouldn't be considered morally wrong just because you choose it, like a diet of porridge or even rats.

It's wrong because someone else who was uninvolved and innocent was hurt.

[text ] mindf_cks November 3 2010, 23:26:42 UTC

As is pushing children off of swings.

Then is an action considered to be morally wrong if the only person (or people) harmed by it is the person (or people) undertaking the action? For example, could it be morally wrong to smoke if it is true that nobody except the smoker is harmed?

Thread 20

Text / Difficult to hack killswithapen November 3 2010, 22:55:56 UTC

Morals don't have much to do with it, it simply is wrong. Now I've answered your question, answer mine. Do you know where I can find the Joker tonight?

Text / Difficult to hack mindf_cks November 3 2010, 23:02:14 UTC

Unfortunately, I do not.

Though, I am curious. What has he done to make you seek his person?

Text / Difficult to hack killswithapen November 3 2010, 23:05:23 UTC

He has something of mine, that's all.

Text / Difficult to hack mindf_cks November 3 2010, 23:20:40 UTC

Something irreplaceable, I assume?

Thread 15

[Text- bored and recovering] heavenly_earth November 3 2010, 22:57:45 UTC

He's directing frustration toward the wrong source, at least. It's more childish than anything morally debilitating.

[Text- Recovering, you say?] mindf_cks November 3 2010, 23:17:10 UTC

Then what would be deemed the right source?

Is it possible for an action to be morally wrong solely because people find the idea of it a bit disgusting or generally not in the familiar view of what is 'right'?

[Text- Yes, recent nasty run in with SERO and jazz] heavenly_earth November 3 2010, 23:30:13 UTC

In the situation, the frustration stems from work in some form. While that's likely repressed in the interest of keeping his job, there are better ways to manage stress and it's advisable that he look into them lest he come across an irate parent suitably upset over his actions.

As for how something is viewed as wrong, the word itself is more of an opinion than fact, so I believe that it's entirely possible to earn that label simply because a populace may find it repulsive or far from idealistic. By deeming something 'morally wrong' however, is to insinuate that it goes against the core of human nature as a whole.

[Text- Jeez, Neji. ] mindf_cks November 4 2010, 04:06:54 UTC

When you say 'the core of human nature' what do you mean exactly? Are you saying that you believe human nature to be derived from the soul?

Thread 8

(The comment has been removed)

text forever too | sup bb :> mindf_cks November 3 2010, 23:23:24 UTC

Is it possible for an action to be morally wrong solely because people find the idea of it a bit disgusting? For example, if lots of people found the idea of picking your nose, could it be morally wrong to pick your nose just for this reason and no other reason?

[ Brb, using copypasta skills, while changing irrelevant things like a boss. ]

(The comment has been removed)

Maybe I can touch your shoulder later and we can call it a date mindf_cks November 4 2010, 00:53:33 UTC

It was just an example, the question would have been the same whether what was considered wrong would have been food, race or a variety of things.

Can an action be morally wrong if the only person (or people) harmed by it is the person (or people) undertaking the action?

Thread 64

Text. zealouspeter November 3 2010, 22:58:22 UTC

If that's not a trick question, 'yes.'

Text. mindf_cks November 3 2010, 23:35:09 UTC

Would your answer be inclined to change if it were?

Is it possible for an action to be morally wrong solely because people find the idea of it a bit disgusting?

[ No example for you. :>]

Text. zealouspeter November 4 2010, 00:03:16 UTC

No.

It's possible, of course. Morals are generally just standards made by the people they affect.

Text. mindf_cks November 4 2010, 05:29:40 UTC

Do you believe an action cannot be deemed morally wrong if nobody at all is harmed by it?

Thread 15