(July 13, 2017 at 9:08 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Ok... lets try this in the form of a logical syllogism.It is not immoral because Jack did not intend harm, however Jack can still feel awful because intentionally or not he caused harm.
Premise 1: That which is harmful is immoral
Premise 2: Jack accidentally tripped Jill causing her harm.
Conclusion: Jack behaved immorally.
Is this valid? You already said that is wasn't once when you agreed with the C.S. Lewis reference. Now granted that you can change your mind, I don't think that you will. How would you invalidate this syllogism?
At that point the harm is the issue rather than the intent.
I can feel sorry for my wife when she stubbs her toe, I had no part in the stubbing but I have empathy.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.