I'm not saying this type of thinking is the be all and end all. We're emotional people after all.
What I am saying is that if you intend to take a course of action, and more importantly attempt to convince others that your course is correct, you need to present a proper analysis of the benefits and costs of your option so that they can be compared with the benefits and costs of other actions.
The nobility of abolitionists isn't why 600,000 Americans died in the Civil War. Nobody gave a damn about slaves. The end of slavery is just a fortunate outcome.
"The nobility of abolitionists isn't why 600,000 Americans died in the Civil War. Nobody gave a damn about slaves. The end of slavery is just a fortunate outcome."
So what exactly was the cost/benefit to the conductors of the underground railroad? Sounds like a lot of cost for no personal benefit.
My original point was that cost/benefit analysis can and SHOULD be involved in decision-making processes, but simply looking at emancipation as a 'fortunate outcome' is more than oversimplification.
----
In the future, it might be helpful for you to note that making sweeping generalizations usually doesn't help your argument: i.e. "Nobody gave a damn about slaves" really doesn't make me think you're taking a scholarly viewpoint on this debate.
My original point was that cost/benefit analysis can and SHOULD be involved in decision-making processes, but simply looking at emancipation as a 'fortunate outcome' is more than oversimplification.
freedom is not the sum of the value of its effects, nor is a cleaner planet.