Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Epicurus
| Reward Points: | 1 |
| Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 100% |
| Arguments: | 1 |
| Debates: | 0 |
Looking at this question from a deontological perspective, the answer is quite clearly no.
Under a deontological belief system, actions are judged ethically (and by extent, morally) correct not based on their end result (in the case of consequentialism, and by extent utilitarianism) but instead by their adherence to a set of rules and respectfulness of rights. In this case, the obvious laws, along with social contract, prescribes that murder is an obvious moral wrong, despite its end results, because in order to achieve those end results a set of rules must be broken. In a society where you allow people to arbitrarily decide when a rule deserves to broken, there is a rule breakdown, and with it the entire system goes. So I am squarely on the side of no with this question.
|
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know! |
