← Back to context

Comment by debatem1

4 hours ago

Why is that how the moral issue is defined? Seems to me the moral issue is the stakes, and I have no idea why I would cede that judgement to you. What's your basis for claiming moral authority? If you don't, please show your homework: what strange anticonsequentialism underlies your claims, and why should I agree with it?

Consequentialism in general is a third-world mindset. But in this particular context it leads to the absurd result that someone who breaks the rules more egregiously is rewarded for doing so.

  • Those sure are words. Can you relate them to the question in some way?

    • In first world countries, we focus on rules over consequences. If you build a dwelling on my property, the rule doesn't reward you for making a house rather than a tent. The moral analysis is based on the nature of the rule, not the consequences to those who break the rule.

      1 reply →

  • > Consequentialism in general is a third-world mindset.

    Ah, this must be why so many utilitarian philosophers are European and American.