Clear questions and runnable code get the best and fastest answer |
|
PerlMonks |
Re: (tye)Re4: Immoral?by srawls (Friar) |
on Jun 28, 2001 at 05:54 UTC ( [id://92152]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
I don't claim that tachyon's intent was to encourage the production of malware. I claim that what he did is likely to do that and so is an immoral act.
That is where we differ than (and that's a good thing, the world would certainly be worse off if everyone thought exactly like I do). The problem I have with your argument is that it relies on the actions of others to determine if someone's actions are moral. What if (as others have suggested) tachyon had posted this in a private fourum, where we would be assured that only a few people would have access to it, and these people would be trustworthy. In this situation it is now not likely to cause the production of malware. The only differences about this situation are outside circumstances. A philosopher once said "There can be no good actions without good intent," and that is what my point is. I believe that the only thing to determine morality is intent. Let's say someone is naive, now this someone does something with good intent, but because she didn't know any better it caused harm. Now most people would say that what she did was likely to cause harm, and your argument deems that as an immoral act. But I say if she intended good, than it was a good act (or a morral act). NOTE: A few times I have said things about moral actions, I didn't mean that if someone has good intent, it is moral (even though I typed that : ) ), I meant that it is not immoral, meaning it is either morral or amorral. I chose brevity both so my point could be more clearly expressed and that my fingers could relax a bit : ) I hope you get the idea though. The 15 year old, freshman programmer,
In Section
Meditations
|
|