[RESOLVED] Death sentence and moral relativism

[FlashLackey]

My idea is that "basic values" exist simply because people are similar to each other (you know, genes and stuff). For example, murder is "bad" because, you know, they can kill YOU, too. My point was, however, that to be consistent with evaluating murder itself as "bad" this way, you should not pay taxes to government who lead wars or executes prisoners. My way, on the other hand, evaluation includes "who decides" bit, and so I can still pay taxes in a good faith in this case.

Ok. Thank you. I appreciate the effort to further explain your idea.

So, to make sure I understand, you believe that morality is genetic, or learned? You seem to suggest both.

I think you need to clarify "bad" in this case. I understand that you are saying that if someone thinks killing is bad, they should be consistent about it. In fact, many people are and are against the death penalty for that reason. But, you're also ignoring that many people put forth a logical basis for why some killing is justified and others are not (ie. murderers damage society or the penalty of death deters the worst types of crimes). Technically speaking, murder is an illegal killing. So, being sentenced to death is not a "murder." They are two, similar, yet clearly distinguishable things.

Those people are appealing to the concept that the death penalty is good for society and murderers are not. So, you may see it differently. But, they are not being hypocrites. Their premise allows for some kinds of killing and not others.

just waned to add some twist for this oneactually, bad example, because nazies were thinking they do good for society, just as present day executors do.

I don't think it's a bad example. There are plenty of accounts of Nazi's regretting their actions and testifying that they knew it was wrong. Some resisted their orders. Sometimes, people do things that they know deep down are wrong.