There are 2 types of anti-vaxxers - the true believers, who aren't evil, but are criminally stupid. Then you have the profiteers - these are who people call evil. The ones who know vaccines are...
There are 2 types of anti-vaxxers - the true believers, who aren't evil, but are criminally stupid. Then you have the profiteers - these are who people call evil. The ones who know vaccines are fine, but push the anti-vaxxer agenda for their own personal benefit.
I think there's a spectrum between true believers and profiteers. Some people enjoy holding a counter culture opinion, I can't blame them, but this is a really damaging opinion to hold, and I...
I think there's a spectrum between true believers and profiteers. Some people enjoy holding a counter culture opinion, I can't blame them, but this is a really damaging opinion to hold, and I think doing so without consideration for consequences is evil, even though they don't particularly profit from it.
This is my big issue right here. Even if anti-vaxxers were right, which they aren't, they seem to think that autism is worse than death. That makes them bad people even if they are the victims of...
This is my big issue right here. Even if anti-vaxxers were right, which they aren't, they seem to think that autism is worse than death. That makes them bad people even if they are the victims of con artists.
Yeah--sorry for the low effort comment, but my mom was afraid of vaccines killing me, not of them making me autistic. (I was born in '82, so maybe it's a different era of anti-vaxxers and is...
Yeah--sorry for the low effort comment, but my mom was afraid of vaccines killing me, not of them making me autistic. (I was born in '82, so maybe it's a different era of anti-vaxxers and is irrelevant?)
I'm not sure I follow. Every anti-vaxxer I know says vaccines increase the chances of their kids getting autism. Are you saying that they also believe that diseases like Polio never existed?
I'm not sure I follow. Every anti-vaxxer I know says vaccines increase the chances of their kids getting autism. Are you saying that they also believe that diseases like Polio never existed?
Preface: I am pro-vaccine and think they should be mandatory. You have some chance to get infected by the disease and, if infected, have some chance of dying from it, making for some smaller...
Preface: I am pro-vaccine and think they should be mandatory.
You have some chance to get infected by the disease and, if infected, have some chance of dying from it, making for some smaller overall chance of dying from the disease in a lifetime. If you believe that chance is low enough and the (believed) chance of becoming autistic from a vaccine to be high enough, then vaccinating won't seem worth it.
For an exaggerated example, if there's a 0.001% lifetime chance of an average individual dying from the Placeholder Flu, but a (believed) 50% chance of becoming autistic if a vaccine is administered, the choice not to vaccinate makes more sense.
I think there's more nuance here than all anti-vax feel one particular way, despite my original post. I think it's a diverse group and I do think some of them that I have talked to definitely...
I think there's more nuance here than all anti-vax feel one particular way, despite my original post. I think it's a diverse group and I do think some of them that I have talked to definitely would prefer to have dead children over autistic ones. How common this belief is, is another question. Importantly I view epistemological responsibility as a moral responsibility. If you choose to willfully avoid understanding in a way that causes other people to die, we do have a term for that in the American legal system, it's called manslaughter.
I think some of them who think they are right are still evil. I don't believe that thinking you are right absolves you from moral culpability. After all many many evil people believe their evil actions were right. Now I think the disinformation should be taken into consideration, and maybe SOME of them are not evil, however some of them completely are. While we have a responsibility to face the consequences of our actions, it is fair that some may not have been able to see past it. I'm not against invincible ignorance as a construct, but I'm weary of it being applied to a large group of people, some of whom are known to know better and are merely enjoying the profits or negative attention. Whether an individual is evil or not is not really for me to judge, however I think it is important to assess the moral turpitude of a movement.
I'm not sure that spending time on who belongs in the "evil" category is productive. What are the consequences? After you decide, what are you going to do about it?
I'm not sure that spending time on who belongs in the "evil" category is productive. What are the consequences? After you decide, what are you going to do about it?
I think here it's being used a shorthand for, "they understood the harm and were willing to do it anyway" and I think the consequences would be some kind of legal action. Personally though, I...
I think here it's being used a shorthand for, "they understood the harm and were willing to do it anyway" and I think the consequences would be some kind of legal action. Personally though, I wouldn't mind if they got charged with manslaughter instead of murder so I agree it's kind of moot. I agree though that the label "evil" is usually non-productive.
It's mostly just the ones profiting off it, that are evil. But ultimately it is not that important what motivations they have. If your kid dies because people in his school weren't vaccinated and...
It's mostly just the ones profiting off it, that are evil. But ultimately it is not that important what motivations they have. If your kid dies because people in his school weren't vaccinated and infected him, it is small comfort to know that their parents were merely ignorant instead of actively malicious.
A much better summary of how I feel and why :). Thank you.
There are 2 types of anti-vaxxers - the true believers, who aren't evil, but are criminally stupid. Then you have the profiteers - these are who people call evil. The ones who know vaccines are fine, but push the anti-vaxxer agenda for their own personal benefit.
I think there's a spectrum between true believers and profiteers. Some people enjoy holding a counter culture opinion, I can't blame them, but this is a really damaging opinion to hold, and I think doing so without consideration for consequences is evil, even though they don't particularly profit from it.
I don't know that I'll ever have room in my heart for a group of people who would rather have dead children than autistic ones.
This is my big issue right here. Even if anti-vaxxers were right, which they aren't, they seem to think that autism is worse than death. That makes them bad people even if they are the victims of con artists.
Yeah--sorry for the low effort comment, but my mom was afraid of vaccines killing me, not of them making me autistic. (I was born in '82, so maybe it's a different era of anti-vaxxers and is irrelevant?)
I'm not sure I follow. Every anti-vaxxer I know says vaccines increase the chances of their kids getting autism. Are you saying that they also believe that diseases like Polio never existed?
Preface: I am pro-vaccine and think they should be mandatory.
You have some chance to get infected by the disease and, if infected, have some chance of dying from it, making for some smaller overall chance of dying from the disease in a lifetime. If you believe that chance is low enough and the (believed) chance of becoming autistic from a vaccine to be high enough, then vaccinating won't seem worth it.
For an exaggerated example, if there's a 0.001% lifetime chance of an average individual dying from the Placeholder Flu, but a (believed) 50% chance of becoming autistic if a vaccine is administered, the choice not to vaccinate makes more sense.
I think there's more nuance here than all anti-vax feel one particular way, despite my original post. I think it's a diverse group and I do think some of them that I have talked to definitely would prefer to have dead children over autistic ones. How common this belief is, is another question. Importantly I view epistemological responsibility as a moral responsibility. If you choose to willfully avoid understanding in a way that causes other people to die, we do have a term for that in the American legal system, it's called manslaughter.
I think some of them who think they are right are still evil. I don't believe that thinking you are right absolves you from moral culpability. After all many many evil people believe their evil actions were right. Now I think the disinformation should be taken into consideration, and maybe SOME of them are not evil, however some of them completely are. While we have a responsibility to face the consequences of our actions, it is fair that some may not have been able to see past it. I'm not against invincible ignorance as a construct, but I'm weary of it being applied to a large group of people, some of whom are known to know better and are merely enjoying the profits or negative attention. Whether an individual is evil or not is not really for me to judge, however I think it is important to assess the moral turpitude of a movement.
I'm not sure that spending time on who belongs in the "evil" category is productive. What are the consequences? After you decide, what are you going to do about it?
I think here it's being used a shorthand for, "they understood the harm and were willing to do it anyway" and I think the consequences would be some kind of legal action. Personally though, I wouldn't mind if they got charged with manslaughter instead of murder so I agree it's kind of moot. I agree though that the label "evil" is usually non-productive.
It's mostly just the ones profiting off it, that are evil. But ultimately it is not that important what motivations they have. If your kid dies because people in his school weren't vaccinated and infected him, it is small comfort to know that their parents were merely ignorant instead of actively malicious.