Ha maybe if i repent and accept Jesus i might feel bad for having done that.
Your point would pre-suppose that i am unaware or unwilling to accept that what i did was wrong. If you were teaching morality lessons to a child you wouldn't teach them that kind of thing is acceptable for sure, but at the same time it wasn't wrong enough for me to feel guilty about it.
Or maybe this is hard to explain to someone who has been taught to have a binary view of morality
Morality is binary :shrugs:
It's like the old "you can't be a bit pregnant" thing, you either are or you aren't.
But of course there are degrees of pregnancy and morality, I don't think everything is as bad as everything else, obviously.
Also, I was mostly WUMming tbh.
If there are degrees of anything than by what way can it be binary that's a contradiction.
Binary is an on/off switch, where as Morality is a setting scale....killing someone in front of their child would be a 10 and taking advantage for small financial benefit is a 1 and at worse a 2.
When it comes to transgression, i don't feel too bad about 1 or 2 offences.
I was aware you weren't being serious, i was just in good spirit pointing out why you were wrong
ismoral = (value > 0) ? false : true;
That's why it's binary...
I don't do much hands on coding these days
You know what I meant
Morality is never binary and certainly can't be reduced to an equation. YOUR judgement of morality can be binary if you want it to be, but you are only your own judge. Your judgement of morality could be the extreme opposite to the next guy's understanding. Very evil people judge themselves to be moral, often citing a "greater good" as justification for their actions. Hitler was the most moral man alive in his own mind, everything he did he did for the glory of the fatherland and its people. Even in the most extreme cases of immorality you'll find not only the perpetrator claiming moral superiority but also the gaggle of self interested parties that flock to these miscreants, take Tony Blair and those who to this day speak in his favour for example. World War II was a "just" war, if you recall. The victors claim they were fighting evil, the vanquished claim they were fighting injustice and fighting for their rights. The banksters who were bailed out, they'll tell you it was all for the greater good of the economy they fucked up. And they believe it. Considering morality is purely a human judgement then how can we assign a simple true or false measure to their definition of morality? What makes us correct? Probably, in your case, you compare actions to a set of rules and measures laid down in a religious doctrine. But then how do you apply those same rules to, say, the Spanish Inquisition? Were they not engaged in the most moral crusade of all, the salvation of man's soul?
No, morality is grey at best. Infinite in scope more likely.
Für eure Sicherheit
I'm prepared to assign the same pregnancy value to someone about to go into labour as someone who has just conceived.
Both are pregnant, that doesn't mean both pregnancies are as advanced.