How is this any different from say a Pentagon or IDF employee who is involved (by some degree) in the documented mass murder of civilians? Their livelihoods are also on the line.

Are they off the hook because they "choose" to participate in mass murder?

▲

rikafurude21 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Youre gonna pretend theres no difference between your entire bloodline (literally) or your salary being on the line? If you work at the Pentagon and see mass murder of civilians you have the option to stop going to work. A north korean hacker does not have that option.

▲

A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

You may be assuming a fair bit. Just because it is evidently true that there is a difference, to the parent, depending on their philosophical bent, it is not impossible that it is the outcome alone that determines level of willingness to accept level of.. dunno what is a good word here.. responsibility. In other words, from where they come from, all other factors are not relevant. I don't subscribe to this particular view of the world, but it helps to be able to understand others.

	▲	rikafurude21 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		I get that a pure consequentialist can flatten every distinction, but in the real world we still distinguish between (a) ‘I’ll kill your entire bloodline if you stop typing’ and (b) ‘You can resign and face a résumé gap.’ Until we’re ready to treat a bank-teller under duress the same as an armed robber, that difference has to matter.

▲

486sx33 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

▲

mensetmanusman 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It has to do with this concept called free will.