Hacker News Reader

I don't believe in these mathematical greater evil arguments. I assume you would not kill a baby even if it was guaranteed to prevent a plane crash killing a hundred people.

One should not make relativistic moral calculations with fundamentally unacceptable acts.

View on HN

You don't believe it, because you consider some acts fundamentally unacceptable, in your moral framework.

That doesn't have any bearing on other people's moral frameworks, in which relativistic calculations may be the right thing to do.

Your point seems to be : people have different moral frameworks. Mine differs to some others. This seems self evident.

That's exactly right. In this light, what one should and shouldn't according to a single person (what your last post was about) doesn't have any meaning when discussing what many individuals could value: that's on a higher meta level.

It becomes at best a statement of opinion, and at worst it can be taken as dismissive of the values of others.

Correct - its a statement of opinion. Yes, I think most of us are dismissive of some values of some others and that's OK.

> Yes, I think most of us are dismissive of some values of some others and that's OK.

I don't believe this is a very useful property of a conversation which is about trying to understand how the world squares with opinions that people can hold.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com