>>91453658Alright, what about if someone loves and gets their happiness from making people comatose vegetables, they don't suffer and they're still alive and can't be unhappy or happy, while the perpetrator is happy with this; let's also say the people he loves to put into comas don't have any family members or otherwise people that care about them
Are the actions of the person bad? Subjectively speaking they can't be(that's the overall issue with relativism)
What about this:
A man lives his whole life with the idea of "live and let live", he passes by a homeless person every day on the way to the subway for work, but he never gives him any mind because helping the homeless person would be uncharacteristic ane inconsistent with his individualistic worldview
If that same man one day loses everything, would he not abandon that idea? Would he let the people with the food and resources he requires to live just mind their own business, without asking for help?
If shondo were to do something you don't like, such as(i imagine) meeting up with a man, would you be okay with hearing "live and let live"?
No? Because it's harming you emotionally or mentally? Well then why overlook the people hurt by m&gs?
Even if you never personally agreed with it, i haven't seen this kind of reasoning to argue against the idea of doing m&gs
>inb4 it's differentIt's the same idea, just taken to the extreme, and like I said before, if it does not work at the extremes then it's not reliable
Thoughts?
>>91454286Same
