tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post3603581613222596469..comments2023-10-24T04:29:23.693-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: False Beliefs and Unfulfillible DesiresAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-85147909249453957962009-03-27T10:51:00.000-06:002009-03-27T10:51:00.000-06:00Thanks for the link, faithlessgod. I, for one, am ...Thanks for the link, faithlessgod. I, for one, am subscribed.Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12968634190280933116noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-82724017713293768102009-03-27T06:41:00.000-06:002009-03-27T06:41:00.000-06:00Woops somehow the link from my aforementioned post...Woops somehow the link from my aforementioned post to this post was dropped. I have republished it with the link.Martin Freedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16952072422175870627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-7209048319286740982009-03-27T04:17:00.000-06:002009-03-27T04:17:00.000-06:00Oh BTW my latest post is up Informed DesiresOh BTW my latest post is up <A HREF="http://impartialism.blogspot.com/2009/03/informed-desires.html" REL="nofollow">Informed Desires</A>Martin Freedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16952072422175870627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-34808932732441373822009-03-27T04:16:00.000-06:002009-03-27T04:16:00.000-06:00Can't see the link will do a search.What is amazin...Can't see the link will do a search.<BR/><BR/>What is amazing is how unclear these philosophers are in getting to the point and the lack of clarity compared to Alonzo's approach.<BR/><BR/>There are plenty who are as clear and regard it as part of their job such as John Searle (who thinks there is no such topic as ethics and famously said , albeit against Derrida, "If you cant say it clearly, you don't understand it") but Railton, Brandt, Mackie, Hare and Griffin are IMHO far poorer communicators of their ideas than Alonzo. <BR/><BR/>This does not mean they are bad writers some of Mackie's papers are brilliantly presented such as <A HREF="http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/mackie.htm" REL="nofollow">Co-operation, Competitition and Moral Philosophy</A> still his own key book "Inventing Ethics" has been widely and variably interpreted and part of that must be due to him struggling to make some of his points clear. <BR/><BR/>[Also note it is crucial to read his follow-up book on Hume, as I have just discovered and am reading in parallel with Griffin. He gets beyond Error Theory there with his Objectification thesis (not quite fictionalism/quasi-realism) for his cognitivism. Still Fyfe's approach is IMHO better (and different on this issue).]Martin Freedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16952072422175870627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-16914651049652680182009-03-26T21:47:00.000-06:002009-03-26T21:47:00.000-06:00"Facts, Norms, and Values" is a collection of his ..."Facts, Norms, and Values" is a collection of his crucial essays on moral realism. Railton is not as clear as Alonzo, and I haven't yet studied ethical philosophy at a university, so it was hard to make sense of him without a Cliff's Notes.Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12968634190280933116noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-39842833900922641692009-03-26T14:41:00.000-06:002009-03-26T14:41:00.000-06:00I am not as familiar with Railton (or Brandt) as G...I am not as familiar with Railton (or Brandt) as Griffin. My next post (written already) will be Informed Desires considering Griffin's prudential value theory.<BR/><BR/>The problem with Railton as I understand it is this, very similar to Griffin and Brandt:<BR/>"an individual’s good consists in what he would want himself to want, or to pursue, were he to contemplate his present situation from a standpoint fully and vividly informed about himself and his circumstances, and entirely free of cognitive error or lapses of instrumental rationality"<BR/>it is a second order desire account, what the agent ought to want.<BR/><BR/>Griffins is milder but amounts to the same thing in the end IMV. I am just recompleting his Well Being and might revise some of this once I get his full moral theory clear (again) but basically it is informed preference satisfaction but applied only to informed desires not actual desires so rejecting economic consumerism (actual desire fulfilment). (as to whether his is act or rule utilitarianism I cant remember and will hopefully get to this later today, in my reading that is).<BR/><BR/>Granted I was just re-reading this book it was quite timely that this came up when it did in Alonzo's blog.<BR/><BR/>Any good material by Railton?Martin Freedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16952072422175870627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-11635627722310962702009-03-25T12:33:00.000-06:002009-03-25T12:33:00.000-06:00faithlessgod,I would love to see you post a summar...faithlessgod,<BR/><BR/>I would love to see you post a summary of Railton's ethical theory. It sounds very similar to Alonzo's, but I can't be sure as Railton does not write as clearly as Alonzo does.<BR/><BR/>What, if anything, do you think is WRONG with Railton's account?Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12968634190280933116noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-70739363455480730072009-03-25T08:19:00.000-06:002009-03-25T08:19:00.000-06:00"indeed the actual versus informed desires distinc..."indeed the actual versus informed desires distinction is, in my view, the key distinguishing feature between these."<BR/>Woops my mistake. It is not. It is the means to evaluate desires-as-ends by treating them as means with respect to all other desires-as-ends that is. Indeed their use of informed desires is a weaker and incorrect method to determine <BR/>the desirability of a desire.<BR/><BR/>I think I have just given myself a new blog post topic,Martin Freedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16952072422175870627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-13730197890172000502009-03-25T08:13:00.000-06:002009-03-25T08:13:00.000-06:00Hi AlonzoThanks, this was my point that a Railton ...Hi Alonzo<BR/><BR/>Thanks, this was my point that a Railton or Griffin informed desire account is addressing desire-as-ends as well as (hypothetical) desire-as-means. <BR/><BR/>To elaborate, in case you have little time to check this yourself, these utilise a form of ideal observer or really ideal advisor versions of the Agent, call it Agent+ - the Agent as full informed, having succeeded at a cognitive therapy etc. and so would know that certain actual desires-as-ends of the Agent are unfulfillable. Presumably, Agent+ would advise against pursuit of such desires by Agent. Of course how the Agent changes their desires is another matter, as we agree that one cannot be reasoned out of one's desires.<BR/><BR/>Now we also agree that Agent+ does not exist, only Agent. Still there is the question over ethics serving to best fulfill the desires of Agent versus advised by Agent+. Railton and Griffin argue that ethics should only serve to fulfil the informed desires of Agent (that is as informed by Agent+) even if the Agent is, in fact, <I>actually uninformed</I>. They claim that this is a better theory of well-being rather than just (actual) value, and criticise actual desires (actual value) accounts on the basis that many desires do not count for the well-being of the agent, regardless of what agent (presently) thinks.<BR/><BR/>Are you arguing that none of this matters, that however an agent might not chose the course of actions they would if otherwise informed, the best they can do is pursue their current, evolving desire set and learn and update it as they succeed (or fail)? I think you are given your counting grass example used elsewhere? This is simpler and I tend to agree. <BR/><BR/>I think dealing with this is important as such informed desire-based utilitarian accounts share much in common with desire utilitarianism, indeed the actual versus informed desires distinction is, in my view, the key distinguishing feature between these.<BR/><BR/>I also note that Griffin's use of fulfilment is AFAIK identical to yours but I believe you got this from C.I. Lewis?Martin Freedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16952072422175870627noreply@blogger.com