I forget who made this argument, but it was in a large-group OODA loop discussion in New York: the higher the VUCA in a large-scale conflict environment, the more virtue ethics is strategically adaptive because it can accumulate a following via imitability.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
When noise goes up, simpler, clearer signals work better simply because they get through better. Even if other messages might be more valuable if they could get through without noise contamination, the simpler message wins because it gets through. It's "brands" for chaos.
End of conversation
-
-
-
This can be seen as different models of leadership, maximizing different eigenvirtues across the moral foundations. Under some levels of VUCA, deontological reinforcement of hierarchy is an effective approach.
-
the boundaries among the 3 seem blurry, but I liken them to: deontological = agile, consequentialist = waterfall, virtue ethics = wireframes with no indication of how to actually build something under them
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Consequentialst ethics are impossible b/c you have to simulate everyone else. Then they have to simulate you simulating them, etc etc. Virtue ethics breaks the logjam by approximating with bounded compute the right answer.
-
It computes an answer, the "right" part is necessarily solipsistic though, the other two run into intractability because they attempt non-solipsistic computations
- Show 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.