That is a very big leap to make. I do not accept the unnecessary axiom that being pejorative of a common flaw in the system is unethical. Selfishness and tribalism are built into "human morality", too, and those are similarly bad.
Morality is not ethics. Ethics are not morality. 0/2
begging the question.
begging the question, equivocating "what we feel for irrational reasons is right" with "what we can understand, using reason and rational investigation, is in fact the best course of action".
appeal to nature
And I was not trying to get from an is to ought - though I can do that too: it is immoral for you to condemn just retribution
begging the question that revenge is ever "justified", a concept I have roundly rejected
, so you ought not to do it. Rather, I was saying that just retribution is an evolved part of the human moral faculty - and a very significant one at that.
As I have pointed out repeatedly, that it is part of a shitty moral machinery makes no difference. We overlay learned and educated patterns to correct our moral (emotional pseudo-ethic) machinery toward rationally discovered ethical models all the time. You just seem to wish to be LAZY and UNCIVILIZED.
You can make it go away if you manage massive genetic engineering and replace humans with something else. You can suppress it if you manage to make some AGI-dictator. But short of that, you are not in luck.
or, you know, teach people philosophical ethics, and design laws that conform to the superior ethical model.
Jarhyn said:
You need a goal to get there, and then select the path from (situation) to (goal) that has the best outcome.
The just punishment of the guilty is the
best outcome, all other things equal (though not always they are, so sometimes it's a lesser evil to let them get away with evil).
you are just assetring the premise here again, as part of your argument...
Jarhyn said:
There are better models now, more time, more security. The only question is, do you think you can be more reasonable and rational than cave men. I joined these boards when it was still "freethought and rationalism discussion boards". "Letting my revenge boner steer me into revenge" is not a rational process, it is an emotional one.
Instead of "revenge boner", you should perhaps call it your 'retributive justice moral faculty'. And no, attempting to destroy one of your moral faculties is a bad idea. It's not rational. Or morally acceptable.
Again begging the question. Are you going to actually provide reasonable arguments? No?
The first thing to do to get to the truth is to doubt. To doubt the correctness of something that evolved just-so in the Paleolithic age is right up at the top.