so it can be justified but still bringing immoral injustice

@Deleted User I think I see where you're going. Like, putting a dog out it's misery if it's twitching in gmthe road after being hit, is moral. Compared to hitting it with a baseball bat for fun.

by pain and suffering of innocent family

like the butterful effect

I said Self defense, Grayman. What you are saying can be applied to the concept of revenge

or justice

The action itself isn't immoral nor moral; rather the intent of the perpertrator

Well, not exactly

I said context, not intent

Or the consequence?

Think about this

If there's a white supremacist walking down the road

he has a shotgun

He sees a black man raping a child in an alley

and shoots the black man

Now, a black man being shot by a white supremacist, is immoral

but, a rapist being killed to defend his victim, is moral

So intent then? Did he shoot him because he as black? Or to defend the rape victim?

Exactly, considerng intent pollutes the context

The context should matter, on it's own

and that's it

Yeah, I see what you're saying

But if people disagree that randomly killing blacks with no reason is immoral, how do you square that with objective morality?

You and I might agree that unprovoked murder is immoral...

Someone else might disagree

Again, context. I think I side with objective morality more

Let's dial it back a notch

A racist man says Nigger on a stream

He says it because he's reading huckleberry Finn

holy fuck

u guys gotta watch that person son vid

Now, if you consider intent, you'd have to impose what *you* think, on that man

Your nuance is showing 🙈

"AI when it runs it doesn't have rules"

matt "ugh.. the operating system has rules"

lmfao

But if you merely consider *context*, the man did nothing wrong

Philosophers can be annoyingly collectivist at times

Yeah but shiv, you're missing a crucial point..

@NotQuiteHuman regarding your request for resources on the race and crime debate, the "cheet sheet" is to go to the wikipedia page, skim the page for what you are looking for, find out what their references are, look up the references they cite, and quote those for your report https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States

I mentioned Albert Fish earlier. He killed and ate over 30 children. Didn't see why people thought that was wrong.

You and I can both agree that's not moral.
He couldn't.

If morality is objective: he didn't understand the immorality of his actions.
If morality is subjective: he was acting under a different moral framework.

How can we ever know? How can objective morality ever be proven?