tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post3810137687815609759..comments2023-10-24T04:29:23.693-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: Right Actions and NegligenceAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-26889252683523498252009-02-24T01:43:00.000-07:002009-02-24T01:43:00.000-07:00HI KevinWell the issue of explaining intuitions ve...HI Kevin<BR/><BR/>Well the issue of explaining intuitions versus saying they are faulty is well covered in utilitarianism in particular Hare's Archangel/Prole models or critical and intuitive levels. And Hare's is basically a rule utilitarian theory and so, you claim, is yours.<BR/><BR/>How about instead you answer the challenge that Fyfe is presenting. He is stating how DU can explain a wide variety of issues over right action, why have you not presented your rule utilitarian alternatives? If you think it is better you should be able to. Lets see how well you can explain negligence, recklessness, bad samaritans, accidents and excuses and so on. <BR/><BR/>This would be a far better and clearer test of two approaches than what so far has been very interesting but mostly semantic confusions as far as I can see.Martin Freedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16952072422175870627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-66038833072371102562009-02-23T17:24:00.000-07:002009-02-23T17:24:00.000-07:00Alonzo,I have a problem with the whole idea behind...Alonzo,<BR/><BR/>I have a problem with the whole idea behind your "right action" posts. You first say that you are going to show how "well" your theory explains certain moral concepts, but then tell us that defend it by showing how well it conforms to popular moral judgments."<BR/><BR/>Quite honestly, I am at a loss for how you can defend any moral theory and show how "well" it accounts for aspects of morality other than to show that it accords with existing intuitions. This is how moral theories are argued for in philosophy, and to do otherwise, would render the argued for theory quite unfalsifiable. <BR/><BR/>Thus, if your theory ends up according with readers' intuitions, all the better for your theory. But if your theory leads to other results (even the most counterintuitive ones), you can simply bolster the theory from criticism by saying that the theory is right and intuitions are wrong.Kevin Currie-Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17401531417243089948noreply@blogger.com