Apparently not changing moral stances in private vs in public makes us unable to understand personal gain. Some real Ayn Rand shit.

  • cynesthesia
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    deleted by creator

    • Ligma_Male [comrade/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      i think the implication is meant to be that they're rich enough to not be hurt by losing $100, in which case the moral thing to do is probably to buy gasoline with the money and burn down their house, but maybe not.

      • DinosaurThussy [they/them]
        hexagon
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        How much money would have to be in the wallet to not miss a $100 bill? That’s not how money works

        Edit: not trying to criticize you, just the study

        • Ligma_Male [comrade/them]
          ·
          2 years ago

          yeah i dunno. they made up the scenario so they get to say "no harm" even when it's completely unrealistic. and we're the unreasonable ones for not stealing from some rando who could have just as easily sold their car or gotten scammed by a payday lender.

      • cynesthesia
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        deleted by creator