I posted this meme to the Lemmy Shitpost community. I reckoned that it might generate a bit of debate, and would probably end up locked, but the entire post got deleted, and moreover, I’m now forbidden from sharing political posts to the community. Political posts are not against the rules of the community.

I have reason to believe that the post was deleted not because it was controversial, but because the moderator (Decoy321) disagreed with the political slant of the meme. The reason I find this suspicious is because other controversial posts, such as one about veganism remains up, and Decoy321 seemed to enjoy the fact it was controversial:

    • HalfSalesman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      I was describing what other’s would describe me as.

      In reality, no one should entertain people who value virtue over consequence. You would let the world burn as long as you can describe yourself as ethically pure.

        • HalfSalesman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Being a professional deontological philosopher doesn’t actually make an argument for deontology. Or that there more of those than others. That just means a lot of smart people are wrong.

            • HalfSalesman@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              I wasn’t refuting that a lot of philosophers are deontologists. I was saying that’s irrelevant.

              • insurrection@mstdn.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                it’s highly relevant to your erroneous claim

                “no one should entertain people who value virtue over consequence.”

                the experts in the field just disagree with this stance.

                • HalfSalesman@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Experts in philosophy are well educated in philosophy, but generally their reading and discourse choices are specifically guided by motivated reasoning more than in other fields.

                  Experts are just people who’ve learned a lot about a topic. While the required reading to achieve that is commendable (given the dire state of literacy these days), so do medical quacks, conspiracy theorists, and theologians and I don’t waste time debating or engaging seriously with them either.

                  • insurrection@mstdn.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    if your position is that professional ethicists are wrong, and we shouldn’t entertain their stance, I don’t see how you’re any different from a quack or theologian.