Hmm. What's y'alls opinion on consquentialism? :/
https://web.archive.org/web/20161115073538/http://raikoth.net/consequentialism.html
@Angle the only workable personal ethic is some sort of virtue ethic, and the only workable societal ethic is some sort of consequentialism, and the problem is gracefully interpolating between the two.
@joXn Huh, can you explain the reasoning for the personal one for me? :/
@Angle
2.
of the two remaining major approaches, it seems to me that deontology is much more likely to lead to moral tragedies (of the "sorry, but those are the rules" kind, as well as the "I was just following orders" kind).
this is the main reason I would call deontology "unworkable".
@Angle
3.
additionally, virtue ethics aligns with the human tendency to want to see ourselves as the hero of our own lives, as being good people in adverse circumstances.
finally, my own preferred ethical framework (Buddhism) is a virtue ethic. so I either have a bias towards that outcome, or I have evidence by demonstration that it can be workable — take your pick.
@Angle
1.
we don't have the capacity as individuals to use utilitarianism (or consequentialism in general) as a day to day guide star. in general, we can't be certain about the utility of our actions, and we lack the capability to internalize statistical analysis as a decision principle (and if we didn't, we'd often lack the data to apply it).
this means that consequentialism is not workable as a general personal ethical framework.