= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
HughRistik comments on Some Thoughts Are Too Dangerous For Brains to Think - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (311)
If following your moral standards is impractical, maybe those standards aren't quite right in the first place.
It is a common mistake for idealists to choose their morality without reference to practical realities. A better search plan would be to find all the practical options, and then pick whichever of those is the most moral.
If you spare women you meet from discussion of sports (or insert whatever interest you have that exhibits average sex differences) until she expresses interest in the subject, you have not failed any reasonable moral standards.
Well, until you factor in the unfortunate tendency of women to be attracted to men who are indifferent to their interests :-P
Most moral by what standard? You're just passing the buck here.
Moral according to your standards. I'm just suggesting a different order of operation: understanding the practicalities first, and then trying to find which of the practical options you judge most moral.
But those standards are moral standards. If you're suggesting that one should just choose the most moral practical option, how is that any different from consequentialism?
Your first comment sounded like you were suggesting that people should choose the most moral practical standard.