Ep. 16 | Is Right and Wrong Objective? The Lindsay Clancy Case
カートのアイテムが多すぎます
カートに追加できませんでした。
ウィッシュリストに追加できませんでした。
ほしい物リストの削除に失敗しました。
ポッドキャストのフォローに失敗しました
ポッドキャストのフォロー解除に失敗しました
Ep. 16 | Is Right and Wrong Objective? The Lindsay Clancy Case
-
ナレーター：
-
著者：
Ep. 16 | Is Right and Wrong Objective? The Lindsay Clancy Case
What makes something truly right or wrong? Is morality objective—or does it depend on the person, the circumstances, or the society?
In this episode, we wrestle with moral responsibility through some difficult questions. The Lindsay Clancy case raises one of them: should someone be held responsible for a horrific act if they were not in their right mind or could not understand what they were doing? Where do we draw the line between explanation and excuse?
We also look at the old principle that ignorance of the law is no excuse—and ask whether that principle works the same way when we're talking about morality rather than law.
Finally, we zoom out to the American experiment itself. The Founders designed a system built around liberty and limited government, but that system also assumed a people capable of governing themselves. Can a free society survive if its citizens no longer share some basic understanding of good, evil, responsibility, and virtue?
Is there such a thing as objective right and wrong—and if there isn't, what happens to a free society?