tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post688832740939551472..comments2024-03-26T12:23:29.784-04:00Comments on Philosoraptor: Winston Smithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08780746334199630779noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-21143480066221997132010-05-18T15:41:27.882-04:002010-05-18T15:41:27.882-04:00Sorry--duplicate post.Sorry--duplicate post.Winston Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08780746334199630779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-14760349642350822722010-05-18T15:40:44.609-04:002010-05-18T15:40:44.609-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Winston Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08780746334199630779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-3835700220472079662010-05-18T15:40:43.454-04:002010-05-18T15:40:43.454-04:00I absolutely agree--and so does Kant, actually. Ir...I absolutely agree--and so does Kant, actually. Irresponsibility with regard to predictions about the consequences of one's actions is culpable wrong-doing.Winston Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08780746334199630779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-26384715976151529082010-05-17T17:57:38.865-04:002010-05-17T17:57:38.865-04:00Oh, certainly. I think that it tends to hinge on p...Oh, certainly. I think that it tends to hinge on predictive ability and how likely your actions are to lead to good results. Some of it has to do with judgment.<br /><br />I mean, I think both intentions and consequences matter, really. You need to intend to do good, <i>and have a reasonable belief that your actions will actually achieve that good</i>. Which is a test that neither the Iraq War Mycahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06169534197143405966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-8639457194937567992010-05-17T08:03:59.600-04:002010-05-17T08:03:59.600-04:00Well, remember, they'd have to have been duly ...Well, remember, they'd have to have been duly diligent about investigating the facts and so forth. And then it doesn't mean that their action would have been optimal, but that they'd have been good people.<br /><br />Easier to think of a case like this: suppose that the allies in WWII had been wrong for extremely obscure reasons that they didn't and couldn't have known about. Winston Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08780746334199630779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-51492806493103648472010-05-14T11:35:29.267-04:002010-05-14T11:35:29.267-04:00Re: Claiming to be motivated versus actual motivat...Re: Claiming to be motivated versus actual motivation -<br /><br />Yeah, I take your point, and this is an area where Kant is solidly non-consequentialist (actually, to my view, far less consequentialist than he ought to be) but the notion that if Iraq had gone precisely the same, but they'd really <i>meant</i> well, it would be moral ... I find hard to swallow.<br /><br />---MycaMycahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06169534197143405966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-25585382313934130782010-05-14T09:37:33.670-04:002010-05-14T09:37:33.670-04:00M--
First note that I'm not trying to defend K...M--<br />First note that I'm not trying to defend Kant here, tho I have certain sympathies with his view. I'm just trying to point out that Harris's claim that all views are consequentialist is false.<br /><br />Second, note that *claiming* to be motivated by good reasons is not enough for Kant. You must *actually* be so motivated. He's very clear that you must be scrupulously Winston Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08780746334199630779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-82783734131485445952010-05-13T15:46:17.928-04:002010-05-13T15:46:17.928-04:00I guess what concerns me has to do with things lik...I guess what concerns me has to do with things like the invasion of Iraq ... the claim defenders make is that it was done for all sorts of good reasons ... to free the people of Iraq, to defeat tyranny, etc. If Kant's right, was the invasion moral? <br /><br />Would it matter that the negative consequences were perfectly predictable, and <i>were in fact</i> predicted by any number of people?<Mycahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06169534197143405966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-12884150841199011872010-05-13T11:42:48.710-04:002010-05-13T11:42:48.710-04:00Myca,
Kant thought ends were important--he just d...Myca,<br /><br />Kant thought ends were important--he just didn't think they were of central importance. Consequentialism is the view that moral status is *entirely* determined by consequences. To reject consequentialism is to hold that something else matters to moral status. <br /><br />Kant famously held that *It is impossible to conceive anything at all in the world, or even out of it, Winston Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08780746334199630779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-26861806317964662922010-05-12T06:12:36.217-04:002010-05-12T06:12:36.217-04:00Joshua, has your group ever thought about hosting ...Joshua, has your group ever thought about hosting a speaker via video conference? The technology today makes it pretty easy, and it would dramatically enlarge the geographic reach of your group. Just a thought...Richard Forsheehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17669282827140244087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-37358850605214973492010-05-11T22:13:54.356-04:002010-05-11T22:13:54.356-04:00Re: Kant's possible consequentialism
When he ...Re: Kant's possible consequentialism<br /><br />When he was discussing why the good will is the only truly good thing, didn't he basically argue that that's because other theoretically good things (strength, intellect, etc) could be used in service of evil? <br /><br />Isn't that just a roundabout way of saying "look, these things aren't purely good, because they can be Mycahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06169534197143405966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-13046125241356922632010-05-11T14:00:18.307-04:002010-05-11T14:00:18.307-04:00I have a hard time keeping track of where people a...I have a hard time keeping track of where people are, but nobody's springing to mind right off the bat. I'll keep thinking. <br /><br />As for a reading that's easy...I'll ask Johnny Quest for a recommendation.Winston Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08780746334199630779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-62836424220673037772010-05-10T13:10:13.090-04:002010-05-10T13:10:13.090-04:00I think my reference to Divine Command Theory was ...I think my reference to Divine Command Theory was a bit confusing, as I was speaking in a more general sense about the problem of "how do we know science is true?" rather than supporting Harris' claims that science supports (a specific version of) consequentialism.<br /><br />For what it's worth, I don't understand the details of ethical theory well enough to say for sure, Joshuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11775844624180825326noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-80989656368503258782010-05-10T12:42:23.066-04:002010-05-10T12:42:23.066-04:00Well, I'm not sure a "damned, dirty scien...Well, I'm not sure a "damned, dirty scientist" should think that all problems are soluble. Though we, of course, DO have random, half-assed guesses at approximations to some sort of vague attempt at solutions. Though it isn't clear that any of them work.<br /><br />I think these questions are rather too difficult for bloggy venues, but here's a gesture at a possible solutionWinston Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08780746334199630779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264937.post-51239167575330281822010-05-10T11:38:18.839-04:002010-05-10T11:38:18.839-04:00While I understand the epistemic (ho ho!) objectio...While I understand the epistemic (ho ho!) objection to using scientific to validate the logical grounding of science, it's always bothered me that, as far as I know, none of the critics who raise this point have ever been able to even vaguely sketch out what shape a solution to the problem might take. What, precisely, would satisfy the objection? Do we need to revive Divine Command Theory or Joshuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11775844624180825326noreply@blogger.com