[Buddha-l] Ethical Dilemmas are mostly easy?

lemmett at talk21.com lemmett at talk21.com
Sun Jun 13 11:41:36 MDT 2010

Hello, I know it was a while ago since anyone mentioned deontology or bribery but this is my two cents. I think it makes sense to be a consequentialist about things that either way the consequences will be bad. Consequentialism almost seems like justice. Thinking about bribery thought - surely we do not want to let ourselves be bribed just for some gain? So I think I am a consequentialist unless in the dilemma one may choose something positive. E.g. that you couldn't argue for the benefit of upsetting one person to make two happy, only upsetting one before upsetting two. 
Does that make sense: *it seems to fit with my moral intuitions*?
Also on the other emails I wanted to make the rather pointless observation that I think that there are less evil people [not less evil] in the world than one may want and that because so much of our morality is from things out of our control I would say that there is more equality of goodness than may be expected. Relevant to the value of different people's lives being incomparable. OK sorry if this email is especially poor: please correct me!


More information about the buddha-l mailing list