1 upvotes, 3 direct replies (showing 3)
View submission: /r/philosophy Open Discussion Thread | February 03, 2025
Is it always morally wrong to do something you know someone doesn't want you to do, ie. reading someones private journal, even if you believe it's for their own good and you have good intentions? If so, is it worse to do it with full self awareness or without considering the morality of it?
Comment by OkParamedic4664 at 04/02/2025 at 02:37 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I think it would generally be wrong because it breaks the invisible social contract between you and your friend, destabilizing the relationship. Though it really depends on what's at stake.
Comment by Sabotaber at 03/02/2025 at 21:09 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Conflict is inevitable. This is why honor and dignity are important, and so are apologies and forgiveness. I do not, however, have any appreciation for justifications. Of course people have reasons for doing things, but when you stoop down to using your reasons as justifications, you ignore that your concerns are not the only concerns in the world, and you make peace impossible. Instead you create a choice between pointless conflict and seething submission, which both breed bitter resentment.
Just accept that you are doing what you need to do, try to do the best you can, and apologize when you inevitably trample something you shouldn't have. Don't justify.
Comment by Shield_Lyger at 03/02/2025 at 16:24 UTC*
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Your premise and your example don't match well. There are a *lot* of things that someone might want me not to do that don't involve trespassing on their personal property or intruding into their private matters. So keep that in mind.
But the question you're really asking is whether an agent's good intentions and/or belief that they're acting in the interests of another person determine the ethics of an action. If one believes that no person, knowing good, intentionally does evil willingly, then your caveats would pretty much put an end to the study of ethics.
Honestly, what I would say is that the agent owes the person whose journal they read an apology, and should be prepared to accept the consequences of their actions. And if they actually mean well and believe they were acting in that person's interests, then it shouldn't be hard to offer a sincere one. Moral justification is not a shield against accountability or the need for honesty.