(July 17, 2017 at 7:41 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(July 17, 2017 at 4:22 am)downbeatplumb Wrote: How is he keeping her from harm? by hiding the truth that he is increasing the risk of her catching a disease? or by the risk of her finding out somehow and the devastation that could bring to her life?
Or are you suggesting that by hiding the affair he is keeping her from harm when what he would seem to be doing to me is hiding his wrong doing and shielding himself from the consequences he would face.
What you imply is a bit like saying the cover up of fraud was to keep the company from harm.
So is increasing the potential for harm is immoral (by itself)? Like, getting into my vehicle and cruising down the highway (aren't I increasing the potential for harm here)?
Cruising down the highway can be done for many reasons but cheating on your wife is just cheating on your wife.
Quote:I could see where he could be hiding it, for selfish reasons (avoiding the consequences). But it seems equally valid, that he could be hiding it, not to cause unnecessary harm to his wife (as stated). I don't think this makes it less immoral. Adding deceit makes it more so.
She still might find out. Like the Trumps are finding out, cover ups don't always work.
Quote:Are you saying, that doing the moral thing, can sometimes increase harm? I would agree . Take your example of fraud in a company. Now simply using harm as a basis, one might justify their lying about it in court, on the basis of not doing so, would cause more harm to the company, and it's workers. I would disagree with this reasoning; would you?
How would lying about fraud help the company?
And of course lying about fraud in a court is a crime which could have bad concequences itself.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.