It’s still not comparable. Only what causes any kind of verifiable harm (physical, reputational, economic, psychological, psychiatric, etc.) can be considered bad, immoral, and unethical.
Anything that does not is simply amoral.
Thus it is a false equivalence.
It’s still not comparable. Only what causes any kind of verifiable harm (physical, reputational, economic, psychological, psychiatric, etc.) can be considered bad, immoral, and unethical. Anything that does not is simply amoral. Thus it is a false equivalence.
No. You’re preaching a philosophical ideology as if it were a factual reality everyone agreed upon.
Not ideology, but ethical system. And it’s because is really better than other systems that involve unverifiable or unfalsable propositions.