New answers tagged

0

It is trivial to find examples throughout history of atrocities that are committed against a dehumanized outside group, which lends credence to the argument that humans generally consider ethical prohibitions to only apply within one's own group. It is not so trivial to find philosophers arguing like this. A philosopher would need to avoid the word "...


1

I finally had some time to look into this again, and I found the source. The most popular source of this seems to be Ruth Benedict's paper in J. General Psychology, 10, p. 59-80 (1934). Long excepts from it can be viewed without a paywall here. I think that the original source is from Franz Boas's anthropological work on the Kwakiutl (one group of Kwakwaka'...


0

this sounds like an issue of law rather than a question of ethics so that when a group agree on some antisocial action it is a group dynamic but unlikely to be a group ethic ie a carefully worked out system of universal principles. social norms are not really ethical norms and if arguments are offered to justify this or that killing it usually involves ...


Top 50 recent answers are included