tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post9136693073633396769..comments2023-11-02T06:04:23.552-04:00Comments on Back to the Drawing Board: Does the "Vintage Sedan" Commit Us In "The Envelope"?Dannyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933199894935324897noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post-73042744936884966712012-09-21T13:19:40.735-04:002012-09-21T13:19:40.735-04:00Thanks for the article, very helpful information.Thanks for the article, very helpful information.Melindahttp://www.dnsops.gov/cgi-bin/dnsops-redir.pl?url=http://jordanhousesc.org/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post-16159640185005438192009-06-25T19:25:05.974-04:002009-06-25T19:25:05.974-04:00Is it worth also considering that something is los...Is it worth also considering that something is lost in the necessary simplification for thought experiments? I ask because I think altruism would be much less controversial if it wasn't so hard to get right. In the real world there is no guarantee that sending $100 will actually save lives and in many cases charity/aid actually allows the underlying causes of poverty to go unaddressed. <br /><br />If charity was like shopping:<br />$10 feeds someone in poverty<br />$100 educates a poor child<br />$1000 saves a life<br />etc<br /><br />Then there would be much less to debate, people would do what they ideally intend to do and whatever labels we might attach to it would be just labels.Gregorynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post-82864416587115627422009-06-05T20:50:15.117-04:002009-06-05T20:50:15.117-04:00http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_altruismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_altruismAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post-21172069291126878222009-06-05T20:41:46.065-04:002009-06-05T20:41:46.065-04:00Well yes, Gene; I am, after all, a fictionalist, n...Well yes, Gene; I am, after all, a fictionalist, not a nihilist.Dannyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933199894935324897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post-64893417042301799622009-06-05T16:34:49.509-04:002009-06-05T16:34:49.509-04:00" ...the reason that we endorsed a broadly..." ...the reason that we endorsed a broadly liberal approach to ethical reasoning in the first place was that we want to take proper account of the value of individuals. Wouldn't it seem odd if on one hand we were saying that individuals must be respected because their lives are important and valuable, and on the other hand we were saying that there's nothing wrong when people act as though others are irrelevant and worthless? I think so."<br /><br />Danny, you're talking as if there is something real here that you are reasoning about!gcallahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post-41780968938024226252009-06-05T00:17:06.856-04:002009-06-05T00:17:06.856-04:00"These include appeals to the distance or ano..."These include appeals to the distance or anonymity of the people in The Envelope"<br />That would pretty much seal the deal for me. Of course, I wouldn't feel automatically inclined to help the wounded hobo, but the consequences are at least contextually real.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com