exactly. "personal responsibility" is never a good model if you try to understand what happens.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
But it might be a good model to see what can actually be done.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tgoorden
I think it is largely unhelpful, because it presupposes what is right and wrong, not how people get to their ideas about that.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Hmmm. I would have figured you for a universal moralist (6th Kohlberg stage)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tgoorden
I think it is a universal moral principle that you cannot force someone to adopt a stage they are not on.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
And even if stages differ, it's possible (prob imperative) to "point the way"...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
... So, in the context of two cultures (nerd & social justice), this means pointing out personal (universal) moral obligation. 5 -> 6
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
At stage 5 it is "merely" a clash of moral systems, at stage 6, this is not acceptable enough anymore...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tgoorden
misconception: enforcing the set of my morals universally is not universal morality
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Universal morality does imply a moral imperative (which is personal), no?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
it just implies that morality cannot be justified on the group level
-
-
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.