3 ms·

Apologies for this comment. I dashed off about 30% of my thoughts (the shittiest 30%) and this isn't really what I was trying to express. I'll leave it here to

• Brakenshire 11y ago
  > If the most convincing case you can make for your morals is "you should because I say so" then you can't be too surprised when it's not 100% convincing to people. Yeah, there are all sorts of questions you can discuss about how your values inform the way you spend money above and beyond what's necessary, whether it's about luxury, convenience, status, or how you would want to spend charitable money. What annoyed me was the raising up of an observation ('people don't care about anything beyond their surroundings') into something which is glibly justified because it is Rational. I would say that's a "you should because I say so", or at best a "you should because it is" argument for morality. Edit: Ah, I see your edit, consider the above part of the fossilized argument then!