The website itself seems to be struggling sometimes
GarbageShoot
joined 2 years ago
I've thought about this for a while and I'm not sure what to say. I don't think I'd go so far as to say that reading any single book "revolutionized my entire life", I just got useful information and perspectives from them. I think that your guess is at least partially right, that some of the people who have the strongest enthusiasm are probably ones who haven't read much philosophy before and therefore are getting more groundwork covered in reading State and Rev [or whatever] than you and I did, because a fair amount of that stuff was already familiar to us.
Reading theory generally shouldn't be revelatory in some grand sense, this isn't a religious text and you aren't supposed to fall into some kind of transcendental rhapsody, you're just developing your understanding point by point.
That only makes sense if you completely discount the husband as a moral patient. While I'm arguing that he's been slightly over-emphasized, I am by no means discounting him and in most possible scenarios believe he should be informed. If he has no history known to his wife of probably 4+ years of being an abuser to her or others as far as she knows, it's pretty unlikely that he is. Making the decision to not tell him anyway on the very, very unlikely chance that he, as a historically normal dude, snaps and blows her head off with a shotgun, is completely discounting the guaranteed outcome of him being wronged by being left in the dark about this.
Talking about this in terms of social contract theory is really sidestepping the morality of the issue. Would you say that her lying entitles OP to punch her in the face? Surely not, two wrongs don't make a right, punitive justice is bad, etc. What OP should do is investigate the issue with her not because she "gets to" tell her side or has a right to, but because he doesn't know what the consequences of telling the husband would be. For all he knows, the husband is abusive and would beat her for this transgression, transgression though it is. The most likely outcome is, of course, that the husband is not abusive, but the most likely outcome of a round of Russian roulette is that you go unharmed. In either case, there is a real risk that is severe enough that it's worth checking, even if it's substantially less likely.
As someone else mentioned, it probably would have been worth giving her an opportunity to give her perspective before deciding if and how to tell the husband. Most likely the final result is just telling him, but there are more marginal possibilities that it is worth accounting for and taking an extra couple of days wouldn't have harmed you or him (yours was already a dead relationship by virtue of your understandable disapproval of her cheating, so it's not like you'd be enabling her to cheat for longer unless you think she's managing to juggle even more guys along with young children and a marriage).
Assuming OP was right, I'd frame it more as his having an obligation to the husband as a human being making the choice correct rather than as a lack of obligation to the wife making the choice indifferent. We should be trying to make the world better, not carefully demarcating the bounds of social contracts so we can find out exactly where we're allowed to do as much harm as we feel like.
But I also think SadArtemis is right that OP, to put it charitably, got ahead of himself
I'd more say that the military occupation was done for the sake of confrontation (this is similar to the official Chinese line). It was a really senseless invasion, as far as I can tell (and I disagree with the Vietnamese line that the war was expansionist).
It's also cool in Sorcery
Come on, you're more well-read than this. You know that military occupation and annexation are not the same thing.
At least Mai is an adult
Just tell them she was designed with underage fanservice in mind (e.g. do a tatsumaki) and they'll pivot.
How could you not?