every act is
1. good
2. bad
3. passive

only bad acts need forgiveness

I think hes confusing malice with evil

malice comes from evil tho

theft isnt inherently evil

its the principle

an evil act shouldnt be done

>depriving someone of what is rightfully theirs isn't evil
🤔

I would be willing to forgive someone who did an 'evil' act by accepting who hey are, for example, in the process of molding them into a better person. That is not permanent.

even if it does good, principle

it hurts

but thats kinda the point god wants to make

you just called a starving child stealing bread from a baker evil

we cant achieve the ideal

my point wasnt done

Or the bourgeoisie being killed by the proletariat. 😎

>be the bigger person
aka, let people walk all over you and have moral principles that are toppled by a slight breeze

the child did an evil act

prove me wrong

you can't

If your ideals are absolute you're asking to be moved on them anyways.

I can

the child was trying to survive

wtf josh is a socialist???? excess wealth should be redisributed!!!1?1?!1

the child did something evil to live

evil is too string a word the child did a bad thing but to jump straight to evil ignores the context

it must be done, but its never justified

>evil
>a strong word
only if you make it as such

taxes for example are necessary theft

>taxes
>necessary
not in my utopia :ancap:

evil is the worst form of bad there is

If you are making it such a watered down word when in English it's a very strong one you're either being intentionally or unintentionally intellectually dishonest within the context of your own made-up jargon.

ancap is unrealistic im done

@Josh42A I'm not ancap, but ancap is a good meme

In English, like every language in the world, words have meaning.

im still done I hate post modernists

@εïз irma εïз we don't have to use the word evil then, we could use "bad" or "wrong"

Is it bad for a child to steal from a baker if they're starving?

@Josh42A
>me
>a post modernist
I am an ABSOLUTIST

@εïз irma εïз it's bad for anyone to steal, reason does not matter

nice try post modernist

perhaps it is wrong for the child to be starving

I can tell you're a absolutist because of the gaps in your logic.

but thieving is still wrong

@εïз irma εïз its not wrong in terms of nessesity , but it is in principle

@Josh42A you're the one with a morally relative ideology

morals *are* reletive

false

It is bad for ANYONE to steal, ignoring the context of specific situations. The necessity of starvation is more important than the morality of theft.

^literal post modernist though @Josh42A

didnt you say things have an intrinsic value

they do

Moral relativism is not a strictly post-modernist view.

then how are morals subjective?

@εïз irma εïз
>implying a justified act can't still be wrong
it's almost as if you're a relativist

morals are reletive because context matters

morals should be on principle

pragmatism is bullshit

if your morality is moveable, it shall be moved, and thus it is relativist

They should and they are, yet morals are not the same everywhere. Only morals that are a part of our biological shopping list are common across cultures.

yes just like society

if all the moral principals were in place the starving child wouldnt happen

Yes I quoted Foucault. 😎

@Rob Travis (Mason) this is literally true

sure

we would feed him before he felt the need to steal

But this is not the case. It never has been and it never will.

let me clarify

never have an ideology judged on its imperfections

only on its stated principles

Never express your ideology based on its imperfections.

St. Thomas of Aquinas is all the moral philosophy necessary to be sound and true

punishment for immoral actions must be relative

>implying punishment has even been brought up on our end

which is why we have different punishment for different crimes and how severe

>implying you have a monopoly on what is and is not discussed

>implying that this isn't a contained discussion between 4 people with 2 people falling relatively together

in each group

Doesn't imply that at all.

You're just making implications everywhere aren't you?

he literally sees in black and white

black, white, and grey

1. bad
2. good
3. passive

3 distinct groups

im the one who sees in black and white

in terms of morals

I'm sure me and John disagree on a lot.

Josh.

Same thing.

whos john

anything that isn't a moral question is "passive"

A Nazi weightlifter friend of mine.

💪

>implying something cant be between bad and pasive

ommisian of truth for instance

nothing can be between bad and passive because if something is passive, it is not within the realm of morality

inaction can sometimes be wrong, keep that in mind

are you one of those crazies that doesnt think black truths are bad.

black truths? ive never heard of that

please elaborate