Reply To: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk)

Avram:

We could probably derive some circumstance which would remove the inhibition from the latter guy too.

This is precisely my point. Even the latter guy is only refraining from killing because in the grand scheme of things it is better for him to refrain from killing. You say that he should refrain from killing even if there was no reason for him to refrain from killing. This is the impasse we have been at for some time now. I am saying that it doesn’t make sense to refrain from killing just for the sake of not killing, because there is no value in refraining from killing (other than any external effects it may have on you). You are saying either that there is value, or that even though there is no value one should still refrain from killing (I’m not sure which one you are saying). In order to convince me (and yes, I am open to being convinced) you would have to explain why someone should do something valueless, or else carefully delineate what the value is, which I feel you have not done as of yet.

Thank you for the quotes.