Being fully rational requires taking stock of the whole. To focus exclusively on good (or bad) is to make a partial judgment. To deny the Enlightenment's responsibility for anything bad after, say, 1750 while giving it credit for everything good thereafter is a double standard.
.Well, no. There's no need to go from the claim that our sense of empathy is a large driver of our moral sense to that claim that we apply it well and universally and I don't think anyone did claim that, did they?
-
-
Well, it seemed to me, at least.
-
Ah. No Pointing out that empathy exists and drives morality does not indicate that humans empathise universally. Just that it exists and drives morality.
-
Of course. No side here denied the importance of underlying moral sentiments.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
But, we're getting somewhere now. I think there were a lot of misunderstandings here.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.