bartolomeo@suppo.fi to Memes@lemmy.ml · 11 months agoAll lives rulesuppo.fiexternal-linkmessage-square20fedilinkarrow-up18arrow-down16
arrow-up12arrow-down1external-linkAll lives rulesuppo.fibartolomeo@suppo.fi to Memes@lemmy.ml · 11 months agomessage-square20fedilink
minus-squarePunnyName@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0arrow-down1·11 months agoLiterally nothing is “good of its own merit”. Because literally nothing is intrinsically “good”. “Good” is a subjective idea, not objectively measurable, so it will always be in reference to another, i.e. relative.
minus-squarePunnyName@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·11 months agoBoth are consistent within the confines of the definition.
minus-squareWallEx@feddit.delinkfedilinkarrow-up1·11 months agoMaybe for you that’s the case, I definitely have a definition of morally good and both sides aren’t that. Accepting collateral for example. You can’t be good in my book if you’re doing that, and they both did.
Literally nothing is “good of its own merit”. Because literally nothing is intrinsically “good”.
“Good” is a subjective idea, not objectively measurable, so it will always be in reference to another, i.e. relative.
Removed by mod
Both are consistent within the confines of the definition.
Maybe for you that’s the case, I definitely have a definition of morally good and both sides aren’t that. Accepting collateral for example. You can’t be good in my book if you’re doing that, and they both did.