| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,21 @@ |
|
1 |
+**I value morality. First ethics inextricably assumes individuals have the freedom to endorse ethical thought. RIPSTEIN:** |
|
2 |
+Arthur Ripstein. “Force and Freedom” University of Toronto. Section II: Stages of Kant's Argument. Pg. 13 and 14. LHP MK |
|
3 |
+The Universal Principle...you will pursue. |
|
4 |
+ |
|
5 |
+**Independently, ethics must be consistent with the unity of action:** |
|
6 |
+ |
|
7 |
+**A Infinite subdivisions of ends** |
|
8 |
+ |
|
9 |
+**B Intentions are binding** |
|
10 |
+ |
|
11 |
+**This binds us to maintaining equal outer freedom - it's key to maintain consistency in the ends we promote** |
|
12 |
+ |
|
13 |
+**Thus the standard is maintaining a system of equal outer freedom** |
|
14 |
+ |
|
15 |
+**Qualified immunity prevents individuals from being held accountable when there is a good will, they don't know they're in violation of the law at the time. ZIPURSKY:** |
|
16 |
+Zipursky, Benjamin. “Reasonableness in and Out of Negligence Law.” No Date. Pg. 11 and 12. LHP MK |
|
17 |
+In certain parts...of reasonable mistake. |
|
18 |
+ |
|
19 |
+**That’s key to maintaining an omnilateral will’s legitimacy - police officers act within the confines of their own rational volition, so there’s no bad will RIPSTEIN 2:** |
|
20 |
+Ripstein, Arthur. “Equality, Responsibility, and the Law.” Cambridge University and Press. Pg. 267 and 269. LHP TLO |
|
21 |
+A reasonable balance...one the same. |