!philosophy@lemmy.world
Discussion of philosophy
!philosophy
@lemmy.worldhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwSzpaTHyS8&themeRefresh=1
Aproveite vídeos e músicas que você ama, envie e compartilhe conteúdo original com amigos, parentes e o mundo no YouTube.
https://fungiverse.wordpress.com/2024/01/07/web4-the-second-end-of-history/
“Dare to Think!”- Immanuel Kant TL;DR: The internet’s evolution mirrors historical societal development. Transitioning from web2 to the social web and ultimately to web4 signifies a transform…
I think this question resulted from me having an argument with my gf. We want to go to a holiday trip, and she wanted to book a hotel via booking.com. We then got into a discussion, because booking.com repeatedly ignored privacy concerns and is conciously acting illegally in regards to privacy laws of the EU (for those of you who can read German, this link from a German privacy investigator explains it fairly well. In my opinion, supporting companies which consciously breach laws is unethical, because they willingly ignore the well-being of their customers for own gains. However, in this case it was probably unfair to gf to judge her for using this platform, as the negative impact done by her using booking.com is not enough to justify this as a morally wrong action on her end.
My question is where you draw the line what to ethically judge. What if (hypothetically) booking.com would support slavery and willingly sacrificed children to earn more money for their shareholders? What if they were very interested in animal abuse and liked Nazis? In this case I think I'd be completely justified to judge my gf for her using this platform, as she would then directly support inhumane and unethical practices.
Most of life, however, resolves in a grey area between "this is absolutely morally okay" and "this is terrible, anyone who supports this is a monster". And so I think your opinions on the topic of an ethical line would be highly appreciated.
Life is...well, it's something alright.
And one thing it is connected to is death.
.
Some of us fear death, while it gets others thinking about it and about topics circling it.
Fascinated about it all, even.
.
How much does philosophy touch the topic of morbid curiosity?
.
In case your appetite wakes up for more morbid curiosity, feel free to check out the new magazine that tries to be all about it!
https://www.openculture.com/2023/11/the-everyday-benefit-of-philosophy-is-that-it-helps-you-live-with-uncertainty-bertrand-russell.html
On the strength of a few quotations and the popular lecture Why I am Not a Christian, philosopher Bertrand Russell has been characterized as a so-called “positive atheist,” a phrase that implies a high degree of certainty.
https://unfashionable.blog/p/science
What happens when you stretch the epistemic boundaries of science too far
https://nonconformistlifestyle.substack.com/p/imagine-a-world-without-caste-race
a world that has forgotten race ethnicity and caste
https://nonconformistlifestyle.substack.com/p/embracing-individuality-or-succumbing
Why do we confuse individuality with evil while associating conformity with good
https://ralphammer.com/immanuel-kant-what-can-we-know/
Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason" is about what we can know—and what we can't. It explains how we look and think to understand the world.
https://tilvids.com/videos/watch/52190b96-3443-483e-91ef-8b99edb3bd58
What would a largely deterministic society look and behave like? Would it be, as some imagine, a more merciful and just society, or as some others suppose, a veritable wasteland where lawless immor...