What we stand for: Quasi-Rawlsian ethics | 96 comments (96 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: What we stand for: Quasi-Rawlsian ethics (4.00 / 5)

Ethics derived from utopian reasoning also tends to be ethics fit for the rulers of said utopia, or at least rulers striving to make their society into said utopia. Most of us not being rulers, it tends to lead to impractical conclusions with respect to what should be done - ie conclusions that ignore what I/you/we can do from our actual positions of agency and (small) power.

It is similar to the tendency of identifying with the rich (more obvious in the US, but clearly existing on this side of the pond to).

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Thu Sep 30th, 2010 at 04:08:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What we stand for: Quasi-Rawlsian ethics (none / 1)

A swedish kind of death:

Ethics derived from utopian reasoning also tends to be ethics fit for the rulers of said utopia,

Maybe one of the characteristics of a Utopia is that while it may (discuss...) have rules, it has no 'rulers'?

"The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Thu Sep 30th, 2010 at 08:44:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What we stand for: Quasi-Rawlsian ethics (4.00 / 2)

Or, in the frame of self-organization, a flock of birds can be seen to have no leaders or be full of leaders, or that leadership is not 'owned' but, like the talking stick, is passed along to share temporary 'ownership'.

I think that the self-organizing model in which all are potential leaders requires some kind of 'talking stick' method for the rotation of leadership.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Thu Sep 30th, 2010 at 08:59:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What we stand for: Quasi-Rawlsian ethics (none / 1)