it is an interesting ethical question as to, when we as a society enact policies that provide crucial general benefits but impose catastrophic costs on some people at random, whether we will take collective responsibility for those costs or say "lol get fucked losers"
-
Show this thread
-
once you've decided on the latter, of course, now you have an interesting technical question as to, if you have a legalistic social accounting tradition, how you prevent the losers from establishing claim for the costs imposed on them denying the costs ever happened could work
1 reply 0 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
that would probably take building up an enormous edifice of shaming around even considering the possibility of such costs but that's hardly an excuse not to bust out a li'l elbow grease. 's just words, people will produce an endless stream of those just to hear themselves talk
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @chaosprime
It's really a question if the society is willing to bear the long-term cost of sacrificing its members at random, as they might be very valuable members.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
good thing the dominant societies on our planet have such a strong tradition of burning geniuses like cordwood
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.