(August 13, 2010 at 9:47 am)Ace Wrote: I think going back in time and changing anything would be a serious mistake. Even if the intent was a good one, the outcome could be very bad.
Though hitler did great wrongs, he played a huge role in creating the present day we all know so well.
I hope you are not suggesting that what naturally happens just plain should happen and should be allowed to happen unaltered? That would be the naturalistic fallacy, surely?
Quote: Removing him will create an alternate future with alternate people. You could very well end up removing many millions from ever existing. Doing more damage than hitler did.Do you consider the equivalent of not being born or coming to existence equally immoral to being killed?
Quote: You could even remove me and yourself completely out of existance.
Do you think that we deserve to exist any more than alternative people in our place?
Quote:No matter how good our intentions are, there are many things we should never interfear with. Most importantly, the past.
Do you think that is intrinsically so? I personally think it all completely depends on if the alternative is more or less moral than how things are now. That is tautologically true morally speaking of course. But my point is that if we take your point as intrinsically true, that "what is" is just better than any possible alternative... I'm pretty sure that's committing the naturalistic fallacy. Anyone can correct me if I'm wrong.
