What a perfect example of the change of outcome based on context and intention. Let’s modify the situation to be that you see a beggar smoking and give him a pack of cigarettes. There is no doubt that the outcome will be damage to the recipient’s lungs, and also the temporary cessation of the symptoms of addiction to cigarettes. The same act is kindness if intended to alleviate the pain of withdrawal, and cruelty if intended to provide a means of progression toward the awful symptoms associated with dying of emphysema.
Regarding killing in self defense, the death should always be an unintended consequence of stopping dire personal harm, but I do believe that for many many reasons, some of them treatable mental illness, but unfortunately untreated, there are humans who will harm you and must be prevented from doing so. I have experienced farm animals made mean by abuse that had the will to harm. This doesn’t make them evil, it simply makes them damaged biological machines that don’t function properly in a communal environment, exceptionally similar to human suffering mental illness that makes them dysfunctional in a cooperative community, but a contender in a wilderness survival scenario. To apply a holy vs evil dichotomy to these scenarios is to delegitimize context no? Are all soldiers who have killed in combat guilty of murder?
Jac
npub14e…wm4rw
2023-11-23 05:55:44
in reply to nevent1q…hxz3
Author Public Key
npub14eng8plhflea40cu3lafnw6nwkxsp5te2v7hzy74lz6a9mjhpaks0wm4rwPublished at
2023-11-23 05:55:44Event JSON
{
"id": "ff2e943f36fc44dc194a2bad2501e27bf0140755e4f86f66b2cc175bf22b7576",
"pubkey": "ae668387f74ff3dabf1c8ffa99bb53758d00d179533d7113d5f8b5d2ee570f6d",
"created_at": 1700718944,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"6191f613787e34b6792aed1278ff916f385ca4fbf3396f44122502ae4dfc82dc"
],
[
"e",
"4dc710a836a4ad70ca43facb2678199c720e62b524191d731064cc13cb564fa7"
],
[
"p",
"7b2d73a3ac9714b06500005454b1b24ff255304eb488076822122101d0fcf7a2"
],
[
"p",
"163f2f91d06a46b51cb34a748167d827b027d9215223abbcaf69f59c6cdfc088"
],
[
"p",
"70122128273bdc07af9be7725fa5c4bc0fc146866bec38d44360dc4bc6cc18b9"
]
],
"content": "What a perfect example of the change of outcome based on context and intention. Let’s modify the situation to be that you see a beggar smoking and give him a pack of cigarettes. There is no doubt that the outcome will be damage to the recipient’s lungs, and also the temporary cessation of the symptoms of addiction to cigarettes. The same act is kindness if intended to alleviate the pain of withdrawal, and cruelty if intended to provide a means of progression toward the awful symptoms associated with dying of emphysema. \n\nRegarding killing in self defense, the death should always be an unintended consequence of stopping dire personal harm, but I do believe that for many many reasons, some of them treatable mental illness, but unfortunately untreated, there are humans who will harm you and must be prevented from doing so. I have experienced farm animals made mean by abuse that had the will to harm. This doesn’t make them evil, it simply makes them damaged biological machines that don’t function properly in a communal environment, exceptionally similar to human suffering mental illness that makes them dysfunctional in a cooperative community, but a contender in a wilderness survival scenario. To apply a holy vs evil dichotomy to these scenarios is to delegitimize context no? Are all soldiers who have killed in combat guilty of murder?",
"sig": "fab954d0ff8241272783865db6e283c8a1fb583d2fd5f8ee460630ffed0a7080da3e3bd0cd0d47288b22bf6119f3b7655286af4dd4ab0c5f40e7c747566f65bc"
}