Alright then, welcome! Just this once, though, next time try one of the casual convo communities.
Edit: Whoops, my bad, that's where we are, nvm, you're totally appropriate.
I only know like three songs
~~and if you asked a question just so you could share something, that's kinda bad form; there's other communities for sharing~~ E: thought we were on an Ask muni, my bad
"Girlfriend" was her best track but "Complicated" was the base for one of Weird Al's very best parodies, sooooo
I reply from my alt sometimes, mostly when my main instance is slow. It's the same username username and display name on both servers, though.
I only ever see this conversation on this muni, fwiw
I was having that when I was using midwest.social as my main. Switched instances and it stopped.
My reddit username was u/nemo_sum, I modded a few subreddits, someone apparently took umbrage with either something I said as a user or one of my modactions, and took to commenting in those subs as u/nemo_sum_is_gay.
I don't consider that an insult and they weren't breaking any rules, so I just left them alone until they got bored of it. Took about three months.
It's a handmade pasta, so you probably will see it in nicer restaurants rather than stores, but if you have a place that makes fresh pasta in your town that's another place to look. Or make them yourself!
Back on reddit, someone made a parody account of me. That's the closest I've come.
strozzapreti - not only is it a great shape for holding sauce and fun to eat, it's got a delightful name: the "priest strangler"
E: typos
So the three main branches of ethical philosophy are deontology, which is based on right intent, consequentialism, which is based on right outcome, and virtue ethics, which is based on right action.
All three agree that you should always try to do the right thing, but disagree as to how best to determine what that is. The deontologist says that consequences are unknowable so maintaining pure intent is the best strategy. The consequentialist says that intent doesn't matter, only the outcome, because that's what actually affects the world. The virue ethicist notes that both criticisms are true: intent is irrelevant and consequences are unknowable, so it's best to focus on acting in a way that's irreproachable.
To get back to your question, I think it's obvious how the deontologist and the consequentislist would answer, but it's up to me to answer for the side of virtue ethics. Say a man who kicks a dog out of malice, and then the dog's owner rushes them to the vet, where they learn the dog had a condition, easily treatable but hard to detect, that would've killed it in two months. Bad intent, good outcome. Deontologist hates him, Consequentialist sees a mitzvah, but me? Kicking puppies is wrong. It doesn't matter why you're kicking them. You can't reasonably expect it to save the dog's life. The action itself is contemptible.
No thanks! I decided when I switched to lemmy I was gonna avoid politics communities.