Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

BryKKan t1_itac6xc wrote

Reply to comment by MyNameIsNonYaBizniz in The real practical value of philosophy comes not through focusing on the ‘ideal’ life, but through helping us deal with life’s inevitable suffering: MIT professor Kieran Setiya on how philosophy can help us navigate loneliness, grief, failure, injustice, & the absurd. by philosophybreak

But it's not really "bad luck" at all, is it? Accepting a philosophy that "makes it ok [...]" is a choice, both individually and collectively. Practically speaking, there are some major pitfalls to such, amongst them: people will compete to be immune to such "sacrifice", people will fight for control of the power to decide, and any group which is consistent immune by such means will tend to start viewing itself as superior to the rest.

0

VitriolicViolet t1_itavuvf wrote

and?

you act like theres any actual alternative, 'needs of the many' is how we have done pretty much all of civilised history.

the hitler example above is perfect, the nazis believed the needs of the many would be served by genocide and we decided the needs of the many were served by destroying the nazis (luckily we won)

1

BryKKan t1_itbg3s2 wrote

And?

That proves the philosophical "toolset" you propose is flawed. It allows you to derive both. A premise that leads to Hitler being justified is problematic, to say the least.

A philosophy that relies on luck, rather than shared principles, also has little value. It requires accepting an unjust world - not just that we live in one, but also that we needn't do anything about it.

I don't see how any philosophy which allows such cavalier treatment of human lives, which consciences the unjust suffering of your peers for the sake of your own gain, can ever be morally useful.

1