Syl ⏚@jlai.lu to The memes of the climate@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 months agoLittle things you can do to save the environmentjlai.luimagemessage-square585fedilinkarrow-up11.43Karrow-down160
arrow-up11.37Karrow-down1imageLittle things you can do to save the environmentjlai.luSyl ⏚@jlai.lu to The memes of the climate@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 months agomessage-square585fedilink
minus-squarewafflez@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 month agoIt’s killing another being who’s morally significant. It’s murder. Just as killing someone’s dog is murder.
minus-squarecommie@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 month agoi do t know what you mean by morally significant
minus-squarewafflez@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 month agoA being who has the capacity to suffer. Depriving someone of future experiences is suffering
minus-squarecommie@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 month agoI do t know why that would make them morally significant or what moral significance is supposed to mean. kant never discussed it. I don’t actually know of any ethicist who has used the phrase.
minus-squarewafflez@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 month agoIt’s popular in modern philosophy discussions. It means a being who is morally valuable
minus-squarecommie@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 month agocan you point to any peer reviewed sources on this?
minus-squarewafflez@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 month agoIt’s used in a variety of different settings and ways online, not just peer reviewed sources lol. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/philosophy/article/abs/is-every-action-morally-significant/8B98FABF7F010004F27F5B0425CC77C6
minus-squarecommie@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 month agothe term is certainly used there, but it’s not in the same context. i don’t think you know this topic well enough to engage on it.
minus-squarewafflez@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 month agoAll I was saying is that it’s genuinely not that uncommon to use. Especially in modern philosophy conversations, not specifically academia
It’s killing another being who’s morally significant. It’s murder. Just as killing someone’s dog is murder.
i do t know what you mean by morally significant
A being who has the capacity to suffer. Depriving someone of future experiences is suffering
I do t know why that would make them morally significant or what moral significance is supposed to mean. kant never discussed it. I don’t actually know of any ethicist who has used the phrase.
It’s popular in modern philosophy discussions. It means a being who is morally valuable
can you point to any peer reviewed sources on this?
It’s used in a variety of different settings and ways online, not just peer reviewed sources lol.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/philosophy/article/abs/is-every-action-morally-significant/8B98FABF7F010004F27F5B0425CC77C6
the term is certainly used there, but it’s not in the same context. i don’t think you know this topic well enough to engage on it.
All I was saying is that it’s genuinely not that uncommon to use. Especially in modern philosophy conversations, not specifically academia