[reactus]

Several commenters here hate the writer, calling him "completely insufferable", "a character that the reader hates", or "a selfish, narcissistic jerk". But I didn't find him that bad? His worst crime was stealing a $4000 suit from Barneys New York.

[platz]

so stealing is ok if it's from the wealthy and corporations..

[reactus]

I didn't say that. Stealing $4k is bad, but I can't say I hate the guy for it. It's not like he ran into the store with a machine gun and murdered the clerk to get the cash in the register. Also the suit anecdote could have been made up anyways.

[platz]

is murder the only bad thing in your mind?

can things be bad without being the worst possible thing?

what i'm hearing: its bad but it's not bad because there are worse things that are bad and also I'm "looking the other way"

whether or not it was made up was irrelevant to your initial claim. the proposition is identical in either case.

[dgfitz]

It’s not, but two others have defended it. Reminds me of how people defend graffiti “artists” for “expressing themselves” despite the fact that it’s vandalism.

I believe this train of thought is called “entitled”

[spdif899]

generally yea

there's also a big difference between "one guy supposedly stealing one thing as a part of a story" and "let's all go steal"

[platz]

when you consider morality, do you think your rule only ever applies to one person or categorically?

[int_19h]

It applies categorically. But the category isn't "all people", it's "all people whose wealth was obtained through fair means". Economic parasites - which describes all ultra-wealthy people ipso facto - do not qualify.

[noobermin]

No one other than Kant (and really, kant's own delusions about himself) are deontological ethicists. Everyone has exceptions where they think the right thing is context dependent

[krapp]

Yes.