[zeek]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Sorry, I don't understand your logic at all. The greater good argument doesn't have to define the greater good, it just needs to show that there can be one. And logic in no way says there cannot be a greater good. So, the fact that you can't picture it does not make it meaningless.

How can you show that there can be a greater good if you don't define what it is? Empty logic proves nothing.

Besides, anyone who has benefited from trials understands the basics of the greater good argument. So you are just obfuscating.

Does that justify child rape or tsunamis? I'm just trying to follow your logic.