Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Richard Y Chappell's avatar

I think a similar fallacy (inferring that a moral claim can't be true because it would be awfully inconvenient given certain non-moral assumptions) underlies the "cluelessness" objection to consequentialism:

https://www.goodthoughts.blog/p/consequentialism-and-cluelessness#%C2%A7the-possibility-of-moral-cluelessness

Demandingness, too. Folks can't just assume that the actual world is guaranteed to be convenient for us, come what may!

As a more general lesson (against moral parochialism): *whenever* an argument in moral theory depends upon assumptions about what's actual, you can know the argument is fallacious, because the true moral theory holds *independently* of which world is actual.

Expand full comment
Silas Abrahamsen's avatar

This Silas guy sounds really smart (and handsome)!

Expand full comment
25 more comments...

No posts