4 ms·
> I'm assuming you can't hold someone accountable to a statement they didn't mean. And yet, you make me rethink that. Perhaps you can, and perhaps that's close
by guerrilla 5y ago
> I'm assuming you can't hold someone accountable to a statement they didn't mean. And yet, you make me rethink that. Perhaps you can, and perhaps that's closer to how it should be.
I would say doing so is fundamental to consequentialist [1] and especially utilitarian [2] ethics. I'm not saying those are the best, but they are somewhat common.
How do we measure if someone means what they say?
[1]. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/
[2]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism
- javajosh 5y agoIt's hard to measure what someone means, which is why I like the idea of removing it! As for the more philosophical stuff, I think I'm talking about (retributive) justice, and even more specifically, about how public attitudes about justice have a self-fulfilling effect on justice. My hypothesis is that cynical views on justice tend to be self-reinforcing, and idealistic views of justice are also self-reinforcing. The primary utility of the cynical view seems to be personal/emotional, but comes at the expense of taking pressure off of the world to be better. I suppose my goal here is to encourage disappointed idealists to take up the idealistic mantel, and learn to get disappointed in people again. It's painful to care, but the pain is worth it to produce a better world.