And then once you have multiple ethical systems and they’re staring you in the face and you still need to make a decision, what then? My current (not super helpful) strategies include: Flip-flopping Comparative ethics Intuitive guesses All feel weak and messy. Ideas?
-
-
-
Hard to say anything without a lot more context, but... accepting moral messiness is a key first step in "fluid ethics" it seems. It's equivalent to admitting that no system can give a definite answer.
- 8 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@Malcolm_Ocean@SarahAMcManus Slowly starting to understand how y'all use "meta". What should I check out for powering up this concept further? -
Supposedly I’m writing a book about this, but in the past > year I’ve had almost no time to write. There’s some introductory bits on the web, starting here:https://meaningness.com/eggplant
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
David, I was just re-reading your article on How To Think Real Good from my archives this year; was wondering whether you have any further reading/exercise recommendations? Hoping to find more tools/heuristics like you mention

-
Continuing that project has been my highest priority for the past couple years, but I’ve had almost no time to think or write. These two may be relevant, though: https://meaningness.com/metablog/bongard-meta-rationality … https://meaningness.com/metablog/meta-rationality-curriculum … Plus an overview of the current project:https://meaningness.com/eggplant
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
It’s interesting/disappointing that in an article that argues for knowing the origins of your moral systems, the “fire in a crowded theater” quote appears; used to justify conviction of Schenck for socialist publications, it was dicta, and the case was overturned 40 years ago.
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.