@tipsfromkatee @SamoBurja Its not that the habits cause the consequences that is interesting for the VE, but the habits forming the person.
-
-
Replying to @GKBesterfriend
@KarmaKaiser@SamoBurja for virtue ethics to be non-consequentialist, it has to advocate virtues even when they result in less future virtue2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GapOfGods
@tipsfromkatee@SamoBurja I think it can just say "the reason you do this is primarily for the goods internal to you"1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GKBesterfriend
@KarmaKaiser@SamoBurja why optimise for the goods internal to you instead of the goods internal to everyone?5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @GKBesterfriend
@KarmaKaiser@SamoBurja by definition for VE to be an alternative to consequentialism virtue must sometimes make the world a worse place2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GapOfGods
@KarmaKaiser@SamoBurja the whole world, including people's internal states2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GapOfGods
@tipsfromkatee@SamoBurja Firstly, I think you're using such an amorphous definition of consequentialism here that it doesn't mean much.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GKBesterfriend
@KarmaKaiser@SamoBurja consequentialism just means "do things that have good consequences by some standard", nothing more2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GapOfGods
@tipsfromkatee@SamoBurja It doesn't even need the concept of maximizing value?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@KarmaKaiser @SamoBurja sure, "good consequences" implies maximising value
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.