/lit/ - Literature

>>12961462
because inaction isn't a real thing

>>12961462
Most people don't realize negations don't exist.

inaction exists abstractly, but in many situations Right action requires active risk taking which inaction serves a shelter from. moralists created a doctrine of 'negative responsibility' to make sure no actions are exempt from being judged and encourage Right action in difficult situations. if this doctrine is taken to its logical end however, you get the suffocating matrix of foucault's carceral system in which there is no escape from collective ideology.

>>12961462
Maybe because inaction IS an action you fucking retard, sort of like how attempting to appear nonpolitical is itself a calculated political choice.

>>12961462
Based. Basically if you believe inaction is action then you are killing multiple african kids every day by not donating to charity.

>>12961462
There are causal effects in choosing to do nothing

>>12961462
agnostic inaction is inaction, with knowledge it becomes action
this is a common theme in most religions where if you somehow work against the religion without knowing it exists/being in a location where it exists, from a theological standpoint you're pretty much fine.

>>12961462

All interaction with the external world is binary. Choice exists only in a binary between yes/no, do/do not. When you select a shirt in the morning, one shirt gets a value of 1 and all others a value of 0. That is the totality of your capacity to navigate the world around you as a human being, the same as any other animal.

The one difference is that your internal field of interaction, the human mind, works to a level of complexity beyond that of other biological creatures (insofar as we know), allowing you the advance opportunity to simulate possible consequences action/inaction, even to the points of flights of fancy and imagination of realms/choices that are far beyond what you can physically experience.

As far as the trolley scenario goes, with the switch, it is no different than any other choice. You pull the lever: 1. You do not pull the lever: 0. Assuming you have no handicap, you are able to perceive what will happen in either scenario.

Therefore you are culpable, even for inaction. To say otherwise is like saying, "You are responsible for choosing the red shirt, but you aren't responsible for not choosing the blue shirt".

>>12962295
>you are killing multiple african kids every day by not donating to charity
>Implying that's not a net positive for the world.
People who contribute charity to Ebolaland unironically deserve to be thrown out of helicopters.

>>12961462

you know if you flip the switch only halfway between the two positions, the train will derail

>>12962424
Is this how you deal with all your problems? Wishing violent death on people who upset you?

>>12961462
It is inappropriate to make moral judgments upon a person that has to make a decision in less than a second. Since the person's reaction is more akin to a biological reflex, then no matter what action the person makes, it is neither moral nor amoral.

>>12962425
trolley memes = best memes

>>12962714
how can wojak have a game with himself? he knows every move he's going to make

>>12961462
I feel if deliberation is required, it's action, regardless of what you end up doing. The best course of action is to simply walk away and mind your own business

>>12962295
I agree with that statement though

>>12962399
/thread

>>12962714
>pic related
>>12962732
yeah, that's how intelligent he is

>>12962399
Why are those 5 lives worth more than 1?

>>12962830
>pic related
I'm retarded

>>12962692
Self destructive cuckolds aren't people. Your (presumably) little point about letting the poor stupid Africans die of starvation on a continent where 90% of the weeds are edible is actually the perfect rebuttal to OP's dumbass claim that inaction isn't and can never be real action.

>>12962866
Maybe take some time off the internet and interact with real human beings every one in a while?

>>12962399
Shut up you damn dualist. How can choices be binary if decisions are made based on multiple criteria?

In respect to avoiding moral culpability, the choice is based on if you believe that 1) you have a moral responsibility to interfere and 2) how you should interfere.

Refuse to interfere
Interfere but purposefully leave it
Interfere and save the group
Interfere and multitrack drifting.

The motivation to do any of these things are all different, and can intercect. It's not just 'moral_culpability_save_max_lives' = true

>>12961462
whats the philosophical outlook on this scenario is cringe?

>>12962913
>t. white suburban retard and/or shelteredass gentrified shithole-residing bugboi.
I trust your opinion though, you have one black friend lmao.
>>12962831
All lives aren't equal faggot. Or do you disagree? And if you do, why? On any tangible, intellectual or historical grounds, or because that idea makes you feel bad?

>>12962945
Anon's point was that, contrary to OP's retardation, refusing to get involved is still itself a choice and not a pure negation of the issue.

>>12962961
>All lives aren't equal faggot.
People are not equal, but human consciousness is divine and human life is sacred. There is infinite value in one's life even if their is little value in their person.

>>12961462
define inaction and action

>>12962961
>t.

>>12962976
>human consciousness is divine and human life is sacred
Sauce please, preferably outside of some book of fairytales by people who fucked camels.

>>12962980
what made this woman retarded
was it child molestation?

>>12963004
1. She's a female (problematic but manageable)
2. She was born in the early 90s (massive red flag)
3. She suffers from GOTIS and thinks she was the sole reason for CC's success

>>12962996
>sauce on a matter of values
Human consciousness *except yours

>>12962981

>>12963029
based

>>12963027
So, you're acknowledging that all of that shit you typed about the value of human life has about as much bearing on or relevance to the real world and actual problems and issues as your rando opinions on which colors are most aesthetically pleasing?

To those who consider inaction to be action: what happens when inaction is caused by indecision?

>>12963023
>thinks she was the sole reason for CC'd success
disagree with this one a bit. If ethan never wanted so much control and credit this argument would have never taken place. The guy turned off her mic after their set or songs so she coudent talk with the crowd and interviews was a dick. I cant speak for the rape allegations...As for continuing the band with edith she was cool but their album was trash which shows she did have some part to play.
>>12963004
Too much
Death
Metal
Dark
Punk music, drugs, and too much success at early age, also the 90s were pretty shit

>>12963044
no, I'm denying that a scientific-rational proof can be provided for the justification of non pragmatic/utilitarian values or matters of the sacred.

>>12961462
Because it is

>>12963057
>I cant speak for the rape allegations..
Proably a total lie, as usual.
>but their album was trash
It was unironically better than II and III.
>>12963058
no, I'm denying that a scientific-rational proof can be provided for the justification of non pragmatic/utilitarian values or matters of the arbitrary shit I consider sacred according to my innate genetic and cultural prejudices and preferences
Fixed it for you and I agree.

>>12962945

I'm not a determinist or denying that a person's mind is more complex than a biology driven logic engine. I said as much in my post about the "internal theater" of cognition. But, in terms of the pragmatic effect, how is your scenario not exactly what I'm talking about?

1. & 2. are exactly the same thing.
3. & 4. are exactly the same thing.

"I will wear the red shirt because it is my favorite" and "I will wear the red shirt because I wore the blue shirt yesterday" are internal reasons with the same physical outcome: you said yes to the red shirt and no to the blue one.

>>12962831

You can't determine their worth. You don't have enough information.

But if a friend held a closed fist out to you and said: "I'm going to drop one crumpled bill out of this hand which you can have, unless you tell me to switch to the hand behind my back, which has five crumpled bills."

The five crumpled bills could be all ones and the single bill could be $100. You don't have the information. Which are you going to assume has a higher value?

>>12963258
So if one could determine their innate worth, you think it would be morally acceptable to let the less valuable die kek? It's just an issue of heuristics and practicality to you?

>>12963501

The comparison is the same when you do not have the knowledge.

>>12963518
Nice dodging m8.

>>12963562

Yeah, actually you're right. As soon as I sent that, I realized it was a shit response.

My line of reasoning is that a person under duress and without the knowledge is probably going to assume that it is right to save the lives of the five because "five is more than one", and I also am the one outlining here

>>12963215
>>12962399

That inaction is still a choice. You're not abdicating culpability once you're at that lever by doing nothing. You're damned if you do, damned if you don't.

So, if you're culpable in either scenario, it seems to me that the least culpability, the least guilt, would be to allow the five to live over the one. You, however, are not wrong to assert that that kind of utilitarian "greater good" line of reasoning is without fault. It just seems, to me, the most reasonable thing to do. Maybe you killed a person of higher capability. But at that point you're also judging a man's worth to be more by his utility to more people, which is exactly the rubric some are arguing AGAINST the lever-puller being held to.

>>12961462
The act/omission distinction is bullshit, all it does is allow you to feel like a le good person while having blood on your hands

From this point forward everyone here should be aware that a consequentialist is laughing at every irrelevant post you make.

>>12961474
Underrated post

>>12962729
I love how every board and community has their own takes on it

>>12962295
>you are killing multiple african kids every day

proud of myself

>>12961462
There is only fear and love. That is the only choice.

>>12962399
Inaction has several unique properties that can be claimed (and some philosophers do) to be relevant for distinguishing it from action with respect to things like moral culpability.

Your post reduces down to:
1 action and inaction are similar with respect to being choices
2 being a choice is the only aspect that matters
therefore action and inaction are equivalent.