In a nut-shell, if you believe stealing is okay under certain circumstance due to some subjective morality you hold, you cannot condemn others holding the same belief based on their own subjective mortality.
For example you believe stealing is okay because the target is a corporation. Maybe someone else believes stealing is okay if it’s from someone outside their cultural group. You say, “hey it’s not right to steal from someone just because of some subjective value that you hold!” But it’s a contradiction because you believe stealing is okay based on your own subjective morality regarding corporations (which are recognized as people under law). Same goes for people that steal from the government, their parents, etc.
This isn’t a slippery slope argument, this is a question of ethics. What I’m saying is stealing is unethical, and not by contrast immoral.
Stealing from corporations is ethical because they are inherently unethical and function off the exploitation and suffering of its workers and the enviroment. Individuals do not inherently function that way. I think we have vastly different worldviews here and wont come to a consensus. I think stealing is wrong if the person stealing has power over the people they are stealing from. If its the people without pwer stealing from those with it, well, that’s just another step closer to equity. Until there are systems in place to better achieve that equity, i wont blame anyone for stealing from something that runs off of exploitation. Understand where I’m coming from? Ethics are pretty useless to me when those ethics are determined by a broken and volatile society only concerned with keeping certain people on top.
Im saying the rich and their corporations arent taxed enough, not that they dont already pay larger portion of overall taxes.
I guess to go back to my earlier point what I’m trying to get people to think about it is this idea of a categorical imperative: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative?wprov=sfti1
In a nut-shell, if you believe stealing is okay under certain circumstance due to some subjective morality you hold, you cannot condemn others holding the same belief based on their own subjective mortality.
For example you believe stealing is okay because the target is a corporation. Maybe someone else believes stealing is okay if it’s from someone outside their cultural group. You say, “hey it’s not right to steal from someone just because of some subjective value that you hold!” But it’s a contradiction because you believe stealing is okay based on your own subjective morality regarding corporations (which are recognized as people under law). Same goes for people that steal from the government, their parents, etc.
This isn’t a slippery slope argument, this is a question of ethics. What I’m saying is stealing is unethical, and not by contrast immoral.
Stealing from corporations is ethical because they are inherently unethical and function off the exploitation and suffering of its workers and the enviroment. Individuals do not inherently function that way. I think we have vastly different worldviews here and wont come to a consensus. I think stealing is wrong if the person stealing has power over the people they are stealing from. If its the people without pwer stealing from those with it, well, that’s just another step closer to equity. Until there are systems in place to better achieve that equity, i wont blame anyone for stealing from something that runs off of exploitation. Understand where I’m coming from? Ethics are pretty useless to me when those ethics are determined by a broken and volatile society only concerned with keeping certain people on top.