JS Mill's harm principle is the proper rebuttal to perfectionism, and IMO it's a very good one.
-
-
Replying to @simplic10
Getting back to the "minimum standards", these are things like "don't commit tort against random strangers" and "don't steal."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simplic10
These are not about maximizing utility; they are much more conservative & risk-averse. They're about cushioning against disutility.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simplic10
Things like partiality to family & friends also encoded in these norms. Usually, people in best position to help each other are kin/friends.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simplic10
Finally, we have good acts not mandated by any ethical rules of the kind discussed above; e.g., giving to charity for distant strangers.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simplic10
To sum up, I want to split ethics into: (a) detailed ideas of the good life (b) ethical injunctions (c) utility maximizing
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simplic10
@simplic10 It's already split that way, yes? Virtue, deontology, consequentialism. So yr point is all are needed and none can be reduced2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness That WAS how I was thinking a while back, though. http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.ca/2011/11/ethical-pluralism-ugly-theory-that.html …2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simplic10
@simplic10 That’s a great essay! Noted for future re-viewing. Could be useful to write in long-form about how your view has changed since.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness I might do. Not sure if I'm even coherent about differences yet. But you have helped!2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@simplic10 One seems to be related to demandingness and supererogatory goodness.
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.