You are reading a single comment by @Brommers and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
I appreciate what the current debate concerns, but was trying (without the mud-slinging and ad hominem attacks which this topic generally seems to descend into) to look at the underlying issue from a different perspective. Personally, I find it raises an interesting moral issue of the extent to which we are responsible for the effects our actions have on others, even though the agency by which those third parties are affected by our actions is itself morally reprehensible.
I suspect that nothing said on here will make anyone change their point of view, given the levels of entrenchment already apparent, but to my mind the issue is an illustration of a wider philosophical issue about moral agency.
Brommers
NotThamesWater
Hold up - the current bout of hand wringing is about inferring vicarious responsibility for another's actions against a third party at a later time.
i.e. By (running a red light / slapping a bonnet / wearing lycra / being in primary) now, you are responsible for the aggrieved driver running over a cyclist later on.