Your "shoulds" are not a duty
I have a friend who, after reading my last two posts, still struggled to give up her shoulds. She protested that, if she stopped doing things because she should, then she might do the wrong thing. I see this frequently, even among people who claim to be moral relativists: they
I have a friend who, after reading my last two posts, still struggled to give up her shoulds. She protested that, if she stopped doing things because she should, then she might do the wrong thing. I see this frequently, even among people who claim to be moral relativists: they protest that if they weigh their wants and their shoulds on the same scales, then they might make the wrong choice. But this notion of "right" vs "wrong" cannot come from outside. There is no stone tablet among the stars that mandates what is right. Moral relativists usually have no trouble remembering that their narrow,
Explore this link on the map →related reading
- Not because you "should"mindingourway.com
- "Should" considered harmfulmindingourway.com
- Half-assing it with everything you've gotmindingourway.com
- i can do more more more - by Claire Wang - cold brew blogclairebookworm.substack.com
- Heading Toward Morality — LessWronglesswrong.com
- Matt Yglesias Considered As The Nietzschean Supermanastralcodexten.com
- You don't get to know what you're fighting formindingourway.com
- On sincerity - Joe Carlsmithjoecarlsmith.com
- reactive agency - by Claire Wang - cold brew blogclairebookworm.substack.com
- Alienation and meta-ethics (or: is it possible you should maximize helium?) - Joe Carlsmithjoecarlsmith.com
- How To Be Good | The New Yorkernewyorker.com
- Care and demandingness - Joe Carlsmithjoecarlsmith.com