Classic

[ideologue08]

It's only a problem if you agree with Hitler's personal assessment of his intentions (hypothetical). So long as you and I are having the discussion, for example - and so long as our idea of what is or is not good is similar..we require no objective standard by which to assess the actions of another.

But the number of people that agreed with Hitler is astronomical, why would you put us in a position of moral authority over them? They genuinely thought it was a righteous cause, they had at the very least good intentions, would you not agree?

---

Really we went from a general discussion of people being good or bad to Hitler?
Fine. When you have a person who ends up committing evil actions over and over either
A- They do not understand the the difference in good and evil.
B- They do not have the ability to comprehend how their actions are good or evil.
C-They are crazy and demented. (Crazy people should not be included in the conversation of good and evil. They have issues which does not allow them to do a or b)

But you're missing the point; you are the one defining what good and evil entail here, why can't you give that authority to someone like Himmler?