How do you deal with the annoyance about good people that are more committed to being good than to being truthful?
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
Honestly, this sounds as if you believe that morality is provable as if you could derive a concrete situation goodness from a set of axioms. That is idealism. Which axioms do you idealize? Are those shared with the other camp at all? Some agree to "idealism is not good".
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @pschwede
Ethics is the principled negotiation of conflicts of interest under conditions of shared purpose. Ethics is rational. Do you have an alternative in mind?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Everything depends on your opponent's definitions. No problem otherwise. Are there relevant third positions? Make sure your talk solely relies on intersection of both axiom/ideal sets.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Addition: Axioms aren't necessarily axiomal statements on both sides. Some may have derived your axioms from others of their axioms and vice versa. That's how constructivism works.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @pschwede
The problems arise when you have divergent values. You cannot serve both truth and justice, for instance.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Those values are orthogonal. But they share a vocabulary which easily leads to misunderstandings during discussions. (Equivocation and furtheron faulty generalization,...)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
In the world of truth, justice is an institutionalized algorithm to reduce violence. In the world of justice, truth is a social construct that is valid with respect to the desired outcome.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
"Idealism is bad", if axiomatic, still cannot derive to any absolute definition. ("Agnosticism")
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
("Relativism")
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.