internet funeral

6905 readers

2 users here now

ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤart of the internet

What is this place?

• !hmmm@lemmy.world with text and titles

• post obscure and surreal art with text

• nothing memetic, nothing boring

• unique textural art images

• Post only images or gifs (except for meta posts)

Guidlines

• no video posts are allowed

• No memes. Not even surreal ones. Post your memes on !surrealmemes@sh.itjust.works instead

• If your submission can be posted to !hmmm@lemmy.world (I.e. no text images), It should be posted there instead

This is a curated magazine. Post anything and everything. It will either stay up or be lost into the void.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

fucker@lemmy.world

FUCKER@lemmy.dbzer0.com

FQQD@lemmy.ohaa.xyz

967

it is safe here (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by fucker@lemmy.world to c/internetfuneral@lemmy.world

44 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] bh11235@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago

the question is literally, ARE YOU RESPONSIBLE FOR KILLING SOMEONE, either by action or inaction

Consequentialism says yes, deontology can say no, depending. Consequentialism is the superior system of ethics in theory, because of course you shouldn't do "YOUR DUTY" if it leads to crappy consequences. But deontology is superior a lot of the time in practice, because the person who says "just don't piss off the fairies bro" often gets better consequences than the guy who uses his galaxy brain to compute a Bentham integral over seven-dimensional utility space and arrives "rationally" at the conclusion that pissing off the fairies is the optimal action.