> true and useful my guess is you hold core values of empiricism and efficiency
-
-
I do not see how "moral & personal judgments are more relevant to individuals than ethical & social judgments" is necessarily a rephrasing of "truth and utility".
-
an individual MUST know the truth and know what relevant actions to take in order to be considered as possessing "good morals", in my view. truth and utility are necessary (and often sufficient) for good morals.
-
Are good morals necessary for everyone? Or merely for certain people?
-
by what standard? like, what proportion of individuals need to be morally good in order for society to have a chance at being ethical and harmonious? not sure, not 100% but perhaps some kind of super-majority. that's the intuition anyway.
-
I was thinking more along the lines of whether an internalized moral code is more necessary for someone with power over others vs someone with no power. e.g. do we demand the homeless be as moral as the lawmakers?
-
not necessary to achieve the station of lawmaker in any case. is it necessary to be morally good to be a good lawmaker? I would say so. we have very few good lawmakers and very few good laws.
-
what does it mean to be a good homeless person? i dunno but I think we can distinguish between good and bad homeless people based on their behavior. I won't claim that merely being good is sufficient to prevent homelessness in some situations. that's orthogonal.
-
Is it not more important societally to have lawmakers with strongly internalized moral codes than homeless people with strongly internalized moral codes? (funnily enough, I expect that the US government would be better if we replaced our lawmakers with the homeless)
- 2 more replies
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.