@sarahdoingthing I realized only recently that utilitarianism does not allow supererogation; everything not compulsory is forbidden.
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness@sarahdoingthing from social strategies of the form "if you don't do the strictly best thing, you should feel terrible".1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MemberOfSpecies
@MemberOfSpecies Agreed, but let me see if I can steelman your objection further… Separate measure of goodness from threshold of adequacy.4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness Yes, that sounds right, and it seems to me "adequacy" applies on the same level as "praiseworthy" or "blameworthy".1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MemberOfSpecies
@MemberOfSpecies The importance of supererogation is in creating a zone of freedom between compulsory and forbidden.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness Intuitions around "compulsory"/"forbidden" come from conflict between agents. The words seem misleading applied to theories.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MemberOfSpecies
@MemberOfSpecies Well, you’d probably agree they are not misleading in a deontological framework? (Not that I’m advocating deontology, but)2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@MemberOfSpecies An underlying question is “how ethical should I be,” which is pressing for many people, >1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@MemberOfSpecies but can’t even be stated in existing metaethical frameworks.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness I've never been able to understand this perspective; "ethical" (in the sense used here) just seems like it means "shoulded".2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@MemberOfSpecies I hope to write about this at length before I die :-)
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.