• capital
    link
    74 hours ago

    You’re pretty sanguine about getting the worse of the two. I find that strange.

      • @ChronosTriggerWarning
        link
        12 hours ago

        This response says you subscribe to the ideology of worse-evilism for everybody else.

        As a member of everybody else, THAAAAAANKS.

        • OBJECTION!
          link
          fedilink
          -22 hours ago

          Nope, not supporting the worse evil either.

          Lesser-evilism freqently produces worse results than more coherent strategies and ethical systems.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            2
            edit-2
            10 minutes ago

            Is this your first presidential election?
            Have you voted in any other elections before?
            Do you even know there are other elections?
            Are you a brick wall, unable to process what other people are telling you?
            Are you even American?
            Do you understand that real life is not a fantasy?

            Answer me these questions six, and a wish .ml shall gift.

      • capital
        link
        74 hours ago

        Explain the logic of “I’m good with the greater evil, actually”.

        • OBJECTION!
          link
          fedilink
          -83 hours ago

          Sure. Ethically speaking, anyone who’s not an act utilitarian will accept the “greater evil” in some circumstances, and if you don’t, it leads to some absurd conclusions, like chopping up a healthy person to get organ transplants to save five. Another example would be, “If you don’t kill someone for me, I’ll kill two people.” I can’t prevent every bad thing from happening, but I can control my own actions and choose not to be a party to bad things.

          • capital
            link
            73 hours ago

            Got it. Voting, in your mind, is akin to two different examples of murder.

            It sounds to me like you’d opt out of giving someone the Heimlich maneuver so as not to bruise their abdomen, letting them choke to death.

            I can control my own actions and choose not to be a party to bad things

            You can pretend to opt out but not voting or voting third is a choice not to help prevent the worse outcome. You’ve participated in bringing that to fruition.

            • OBJECTION!
              link
              fedilink
              -73 hours ago

              I thought you were asking for why one would be accept a greater evil, generally speaking, so I demonstrated why lesser evilism is not automatically the correct position.

              You’ve participated in bringing that to fruition.

              Nope, that is blatantly false. Not voting for either major candidate, so by definition I haven’t participated in getting either of them elected.

              • capital
                link
                73 hours ago

                Sure.

                And a doctor who refuses to participate in the harm of removing a limb letting the person die from gangrene is “not participating” and not responsible for the outcome.

                • OBJECTION!
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -62 hours ago

                  Whether he’s responsible is one thing, but claiming that the doctor participated in giving him gangrene would be completely absurd.

                  • capital
                    link
                    5
                    edit-2
                    2 hours ago

                    No. You’ve incorrectly identified what I implied the doctor has participated in. You’d like for me to have said the doc somehow gave the person gangrene but I didn’t and did not imply that.

                    The doctor did however participate in letting a person die. He could have done otherwise but chose not to.

                    You see, removing a limb is a harm and he just can’t bring himself to do it. He will sleep soundly knowing he did no harm.

              • @Rhoeri
                link
                English
                42 hours ago

                know that there will still be an election, right? Not voting simply says you’re fine with either candidate winning. Which clearly shows your entitlement as you must not have much to worry about. It’s this, or you don’t even live in the states.

                So pick one:

                1. You’re okay with either because you’re entitled and won’t suffer under either and don’t care at all about those that will. Or…
                2. You don’t live in America and therefore are here in bad faith to disrupt an election.