Those things should be avoided. Ignoring the basic nature of human behavior, and pretending that morals and ethics are decrees handed down by some paranormal figure instead of human creations meant to justify that behavior, won’t make those things go away. No “evil” person was ever persuaded to change their ways by being told that they were a bad man and should stop being so naughty.
I do no such thing.
It is how the world works whether we like it or not.
All actions are the responsibility of the person who decides to commit them, not the fault of the tools they use to do them.
Legally, yes. In reality, I have a job because I have agreed to sell my free will to another, and I am not responsible for the work my employer uses me to do.
No, I’m just a realist.
Yes, yes you are. I get how it could be nice to abdicate all responsibility the way you do because hey, they’re mightier and you’re just a little old cog. But that is, of course, bullshit. You’re not a tool, you’re a grown man with a working cortex. The only one responsible for what you do at any given time is you. Your moral compass is evidently shot to shit, and that’s an shame, not to mention thoroughly unpleasant for the bystanders - but it’s on you, dawg.
While you are a tool, you are also a person, who has a responsibility to not commit atrocities just because someone asked you to. An individual only has a limited capacity to do evil. The Breiviks and McVeys of the world might be able to kill a hundred people, but to kill a million - to commit a Holocaust or a Rape of Nanking - they need people like you, cowards who pretend they had no other choice than to actively aid them in their crimes.
Smapti, if your boss told you to murder a hobo in an alley, would you do it? What if a government official or police officer told you to do it?
When someone tells you to do something, you still have the decision to do it or not. So if your boss tells you to commit murder, and you do it, then you’re responsible – because you decided to commit murder.
It’s not legal to buy and sell “free will” to another. Whatever your job, you have not agreed to sell your free will.
You are not describing the real world. Your view of reality is extremely warped.
So you are saying you are a tool?
That explains a lot.
By definition, that is what employment is - accepting money in exchange for doing what someone else tells you to do instead of what you want to do.
You have exactly as much capacity to do evil as you do to do magic.
The laws of Germany and Japan didn’t define those activities as crimes, and they werent halted by sitting their leaders down and telling them they were being naughty and Jesus was going to be cross with them. They were stopped by military force, because might makes right.
I would refuse because that’s not in my job description and I haven’t received proper training on how to kill a hobo, and since my boss in this scenario is the kind of person who would order an employee to kill a hobo, he’d probably fire me for insubordination and get another employee to do it.
Then I’d go to the employee association and tell them why I was fired, and they’d reinstate me and give me back pay for the time I was out of work, and my boss would probably lose his job.
Then my own life would probably be in danger if I disobeyed, so I’d do it.
You really needed to try that line before the five-minute window expired for memory-holing all the evidence to the contrary you’ve been generating.
No it’s not. As you describe in your next post. You’re contradicting yourself.
Employment is accepting money in exchange for doing certain tasks. Except for the remnants of slavery, there are no cases today where those certain tasks include any possible thing you are told to do.
You’re contradicting yourself again. The mighty government has decreed that if you obey the order, you are as guilty as the order-giver. By your own argument, you must forthwith bow to this decree and quit pretending otherwise.
To be fair, for Smapti it’s significant progress if you have to refer to two different posts to find a logical contradiction.
This meets the coward and idiot part in the OP. You do realize that if you did this, you would most likely be prosecuted for murder, right? That obeying this police officer or government official would be breaking the law?
So which is more important – obeying the law or obeying authority? Sometimes they conflict.
Addendum: In the case where the servile obedience is to a government authority and not just any old person in charge, the title trifecta is achieved.
Cite the law that requires me to hold the same opinion as the majority of voters.
Depends.
Cite for my saying the state is God?
On what? In the scenario I described to you – a police officer stops you, leads you to an alley, points to a hobo, and says “kill him”-- this would definitely be breaking the law to obey him.
So what is the proper response when the law and authority conflict?