Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

When ethics break down

rated by 0 users
This post has 10 Replies | 3 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,745
Wheylous Posted: Thu, May 24 2012 10:49 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/indian-state-oks-shooting-tiger-poachers-sight-124532261.html

No ethical argument's gonna work here.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590
Autolykos replied on Thu, May 24 2012 10:51 AM

Why not?

Edit: also, given this, the poachers have nothing to lose by in turn shooting the "poacher-poachers" on sight.

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,745
Wheylous replied on Thu, May 24 2012 10:54 AM

When you accept that an animal life is more important than a human life, no human-based ethics works.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,679
Points 45,110
gotlucky replied on Thu, May 24 2012 11:04 AM

Well, I would say that not all human lives are necessarily more important than animal lives.  Privatize the conservations, and I bet most of the poaching would go away.  It's always possible that even if it were privatized, that the situation could get so bad that shooting poachers is the only way to resolve it, but I doubt that it would have reached that point.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,389
Points 21,840
Moderator

Ethical arguments don't work anywhere.

The left is going to always win this, because they are the ones who are fashionable and create the ethos (customs) that we have to play by, plain and simple.  We just have to live with that fact.  If they can do such a thing, they are "correct".  If there is a demand for the product of "left wing values", so be it.. It's no different than a demand for Cinnamon Toast Crunch, freedom, or anything else anyone wants to sell - the consequences and imperatives to act are still the same.

I suppose if you want to try to irk a lefty you can ask them or show them at what point they become a conservative, or at what point they don't care to  "progress" - in this case it could be the point of conserving some type of human:tiger ratio.  In this case their values are just as silly as any other "conservative values" and you can laugh in their face.

The only problem with this tactic is they can call you "reactionary", "petit bourgoise", or whatever and they would be right to do so (in a sense) if what they are saying is socially fashionable.  In which case you are only left with one more way to try to irk the little buggers; which is saying all a conservative does is try to affirm and keep in power what is socially fashionable.

Either way, ditch ethics

"As in a kaleidoscope, the constellation of forces operating in the system as a whole is ever changing." - Ludwig Lachmann

"When A Man Dies A World Goes Out of Existence"  - GLS Shackle

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 254
Points 5,500

vive la insurrection:

Ethical arguments don't work anywhere.

The left is going to always win this, because they are the ones who are fashionable and create the ethos (customs) that we have to play by, plain and simple.  We just have to live with that fact.  If they can do such a thing, they are "correct".  If there is a demand for the product of "left wing values", so be it.. It's no different than a demand for Cinnamon Toast Crunch, freedom, or anything else anyone wants to sell - the consequences and imperatives to act are still the same.

I suppose if you want to try to irk a lefty you can ask them or show them at what point they become a conservative, or at what point they don't care to  "progress" - in this case it could be the point of conserving some type of human:tiger ratio.  In this case their values are just as silly as any other "conservative values" and you can laugh in their face.

The only problem with this tactic is they can call you "reactionary", "petit bourgoise", or whatever and they would be right to do so (in a sense) if what they are saying is socially fashionable.  In which case you are only left with one more way to try to irk the little buggers; which is saying all a conservative does is try to affirm and keep in power what is socially fashionable.

Either way, ditch ethics

Vive, you're one of few people who make complete sense on these forums. Keep up the good work.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590
Autolykos replied on Thu, May 24 2012 1:52 PM

vive la insurrection:
Ethical arguments don't work anywhere.

Sure they do.

vive la insurrection:
Either way, ditch ethics

No.

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,258
Points 34,610
Anenome replied on Fri, May 25 2012 4:02 AM

To abandon ethics to the left is literally to concede the battle.

Personally I take my cue from Rand's objectivist ethics, as an ethics derived entirely from reason and reality. Such an ethic without any religious connotations could be successfully applied in a pluralistic society, and successfully argued due to its rational basis.

Autarchy: rule of the self by the self; the act of self ruling.
  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,745
Wheylous replied on Fri, May 25 2012 4:09 PM

Objectivists of the world unite.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 254
Points 5,500

Anenome:

To abandon ethics to the left is literally to concede the battle.

Personally I take my cue from Rand's objectivist ethics, as an ethics derived entirely from reason and reality. Such an ethic without any religious connotations could be successfully applied in a pluralistic society, and successfully argued due to its rational basis.

I'm liking Objectivism more and more these days. It's as practical as you get. A nice refresher from the ins and outs of idealist ethics, metaphysics and epistemology.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,258
Points 34,610
Anenome replied on Fri, May 25 2012 5:00 PM

Wheylous:

Objectivists of the world unite.

Damn straight ;)

Autarchy: rule of the self by the self; the act of self ruling.
  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (11 items) | RSS