If the only use of force that is moral is reactive, is it possible to have pro-active reactionary force?

Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 3 months ago to Philosophy
57 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Would Objectivists find pre-emptive use of force to prevent or reduce force about to be used against them, moral?

All Comments

  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    OK. Good. So, if you have a loved one who has a terminal illness and is in terrible pain that cannot be alleviated by drugs. Is mercy killing moral? Even if they beg you to help them?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 12 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    If deemed to be imminent is reasonably rational knowledge, then defensive force is justifiable.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 12 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It might be helpful to the discussion if you defined which moral system you're discussing.

    Just a suggestion.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Rozar 12 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I think morality is subjective, but you can still objectively measure its purpose and ability to reach that purpose.

    This goes back to the is ought gap. Which AR attempted to solve but I don't think she did.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 12 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    By the way, great book, really fascinating plot line.

    Oops, I forgot that I need to write a review.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 12 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    again, you go back to a social contract. If I remove that I have agreed implicitly to such, then I would take action. Force against a slave owner, for example...
    This is addressed in our novel, PoJ, btw...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 12 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    in law it is called mens rea
    A man lays dead in the street. A murder, accident, natural causes-the facts matter
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 12 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Murder is still murder, but you have to have the facts in order to determine
    The Law of Gravity stands, but the actual path a object will take depends on its position, initial velocity, acceleration in an arc, etc
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Instead of "where one is afraid that force may be used" substitute, "the use of force against them is deemed to be imminent."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    So, morality is subjective, based on circumstances (or knowledge - no trying to put words in your mouth)?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    OK. I can accept that. But wouldn't it be true that if it is moral to act as a nation, then the same should be true at the individual level?

    Does an immoral individual lose all rights?

    How can it be moral in the collective but not moral in the individual (or vice versa)?

    Plus, I have a personal issue with the term "outlaw," as laws are arbitrary and created by man, not derived as innate rights.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 12 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    all other things being equal, I would look at the logical probability of something nefarious in those situations. I don't have enough details, but logically, I would assume the child to be playing games, throwing a tantrum, etc. It's a risk, but I don't have enough information
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 3 months ago in reply to this comment.
    OK, what about the instance where an adult was restraining a child whom they said was their own child, but the child said they weren't (this was actually the subject of a social experiment conducted by a filmmaker recently). Does that change your response?
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo