[Buddha-l] Ethical Dilemmas

Erik Hoogcarspel jehms at xs4all.nl
Thu Jun 10 09:39:21 MDT 2010

Op 10-06-10 16:55, Stefan Detrez schreef:
> Continued. Pressed the send button too soon.
>> Not acting can motivated by not wishing to actively cause pain, and
>> allowing pain to be caused is slightly different - you can allow pain by
>> consciously chosing to do so, but you can also refrain from consciously
>> chosing to allow pain to be caused. The result is the same, but the
>> motivation is different. You'd think becoming trapped in a moral paralysis
>> is morally justifiable, eventhough such justification would have horrible
>> consequences.
Let me remind you that ethics is not about the best decision, but the 
about which decision one can justify the best. So it's a decision to the 
best of your knowledge.  It is obvious that the decision that causes he 
least amount of victims is the easiest to justify, no matter what kind 
of ethical vision you use. The most difficult one is when you have two 
persons against each other. There are many examples of that kind of 
cases. In that kind there is no justification for a choice, so you have 
to flip a coin.


More information about the buddha-l mailing list