sometimes it's detrimental

the two do not correlate at all

because what is good has absolutely positively nothing to do with the world

boiling a dog isn't immoral because the dog suffers

it is immoral because of the internal metaphysics of making that choice

it is immoral because of the way your soul has to be in order to do it

What are the internal choices needed to cook a dog

what matters is your soul

not the dog

Malice

spite

What is one giving up to cook a dog

cruelty

callousness

etc etc

*internal* things

not *external* things

the only thing that's real is your soul

everything else is irrelevant

But cooking any animal to eat is requires that

no

You still have to kill it

you don't need malice to kill something

the point is, that in torturing the dog you['re choosing to be evil. you dont need to do any of those things to the dog, but you're choosing that. you dont need to torture a pig to eat it, you just kill it and cook it's meat.

^

what matters is what is going on in your soul

not what is going on in the world

If you kill something incorrectly, it causes a massive amount of torture to the animal

intent

not actions

making a mistake is different

not consequences

only intent

only what is inside matters

this reminds me of that drunk russian

So if someone, in the best of intentions, ends up causing massive amounts of torture, death, and pain, are they still good?

Or are there degrees of intent

yes

the consequences literally do not matter at all

intent is intent. you indend to do something. you know if you intend to do something or not