Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 480300938230497281
you are talkign now out of power
Choosing to not choose is a choice. To choose not to, one has to be aware of the choice.
with those unetical line of thoghts you are giving people guilt or resposability of actions and choices they had ntohing to do with
tribalistic
Now thays a rather pointed accusation you are making no?
no
thats ethics
We are not talking about laws or crime here.
ethics is not that
I am saying that holding a neutral position on something is a side on its own.
the base of all judgment on a person it starts on the line of choices the person has done in his, her life
Or in other words you choose to withhold judgement until something changes you mind
yes
There is no harm in choosing
Or choosing not to choose
of course theres no harm but is unethical
and if applied in real life with out proper explanation will lead to unethical behaivour
for example senators and such
on laws, theyh ave an abstain vote
but by abstaining they are pandering to the mayority
Wouldnt the whole choice thing bypass that?
no
So lets get this straight
they abstain knowingly
this si an example of people chosing to be neutral
You dont think not making a choice does not count as making a choice
hyh?
huh?
lol
that sentence needs more negations
that wasnt my point
We lost the point 50 messages ago
my point was, that a person taht is ignorant of the making of any choice and by that they are neutral of it they are not making any choice so they are not responsable
Where did responsibility come into this?
if a person knows the subject at hand, and decides to not to decide then thats a choice
that carries repercusion
Thats assuming the individual also knows the repercussions of his choice
yes
Hey what in the sam hill is goin on here?!
Buut that is not always true