If a man commits a charitable act in a forest and nobody is there to see him, does he afford himself the identity of a charitable man?
-
-
Replying to @nouswaves
Point is: some existences are purely social. Anonymise them and the act might have affected the tribe but it won't be symbol of itself.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @nouswaves
@sebinsua On this one, The Christian view is interesting. Matthew 6. Jesus seems to find acts to be moral only if they are not symbols.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nouswaves
@hibikir1 Basically even if you have super good intentions, you can't completely remake your ethics independent of societies perceptions.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nouswaves
@hibikir1 And there are certain social signals you're expected to maintain. Imagine Jesus had hidden every ethical act he did for example...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nouswaves
@sebinsua Matthew covers an interesting ethical point: There is good due to personal ethics, and then there's behavior done to be seen.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
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.