And I’m being serious. I feel like there might be an argument there, I just don’t understand it. Can someone please “steelman” that argument for me?
You must log in or register to comment.
It doesn’t have to make sense for people to convince themselves to do it. It will certainly lead to worse outcomes for gaza
If your morals disregard the probable outcomes and is more focused on normative rules you could make some arguments but that kind of purity won’t save a single starving child in gaza
Edit: spelling
Maybe people believe that it will save a starving child in the future. Like, some future where politicians finally listen to them?
So it’s the moral argument of killing kids now in the hope of making a point that might or might not affect future politicians?