Sociology: When a person advocates an immoral/unethical solution to a social problem, what type of background do they normally share?
I've seen people advocating uncivilized solutions to problems, which have solutions that can be moral and ethical:
▶️ Killing immigrants who cross illegally into the U.S.
▶️ Roundup and put homeless people into concentration camps.
▶️ Take away social programs from people who depend on them without replacement programs.
What causes a person to develop such destructive "solutions"? What background do they normally share?
▶️ Were they abused?
▶️ Were they from broken/abusive families?
▶️ Did they never learn morality and were always spoiled?
You would think there should be a common denominator since I see it constantly, anymore.
▶️ Society doesn't offer resistance and is more tolerant of these individuals?
Take Care, With 💙 Through God and Jesus and The Holy Ghost,
- BoboLv 71 year agoFavorite Answer
Morals are different for different people. Also, logic is different. Some people subscribe to "emotional" logic and others subscribe to "rational" logic. The emotional logic people will more likely treat symptoms of social problems without regard to the underlying causes. Rational logic people will more likely want to find the root of the problem and address it at that level. Neither approach is best, but it's just the way people are wired.