No, I think rules and laws are basically fences for idiots to try and convince them that they can only draw inside the lines of life and it generally works pretty well.
Al Capone was based as fuck for running liquor. He was also ethically negative for killing people. I can like him for one thing and dislike the other.
I imagine I've heard your arguments before, just as I'm sure you've heard mine, yes.
No, I think rules and laws are basically fences for idiots to try and convince them that they can only draw inside the lines of life and it generally works pretty well.
That's true, particularly when looking at laws and rules as tools rather than ethical standards. But then you're advocating using that tool in a manner that doesn't achieve the goal, basically "It's better to use shovels and weeks to dig the ditch rather than a plow and ten minutes, because shovels are for ditches and plows are for fields."
Al Capone was based as fuck for running liquor.
I understand what you mean about not judging someone based solely on one quality or feat. Over all if I have to choose between getting my drink on, but at the cost of the Valentine Day massacre two speakeasies over... I'd rather just stay dry.
Which interestingly enough is a choice I've already made, for significantly smaller reasons.
As long as the consequences are severe enough, does it matter if the consequences are for the right reasons?
Would it be better if Al Capone never went to jail for murder instead of going to jail for tax evasion?
Yes to both questions.
/edit
Maybe pick a different person because I personally find tax evasion to be something people should be given trophies for.
Then it seems your more interested in people following rules rather than having a just society where the rules are tools and not the goal.
Surely you understand why I have to disagree with your stance on taxes?
Al Capone was based as fuck for running liquor. He was also ethically negative for killing people. I can like him for one thing and dislike the other.
That's true, particularly when looking at laws and rules as tools rather than ethical standards. But then you're advocating using that tool in a manner that doesn't achieve the goal, basically "It's better to use shovels and weeks to dig the ditch rather than a plow and ten minutes, because shovels are for ditches and plows are for fields."
I understand what you mean about not judging someone based solely on one quality or feat. Over all if I have to choose between getting my drink on, but at the cost of the Valentine Day massacre two speakeasies over... I'd rather just stay dry.
Which interestingly enough is a choice I've already made, for significantly smaller reasons.