3 upvotes, 0 direct replies (showing 0)
View submission: /r/philosophy Open Discussion Thread | February 03, 2025
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.
There's nothing here!