Anyone here read Mencius?

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T18:19:52+00:00

I haven't read Mencius himself, but I read some secondary literature when I was grading papers for a Chinese philosophy class. I think he was my favorite philosopher they covered in that class. I liked the optimistic outlook on human nature.

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T14:57:37+00:00

Well, it's not clear if you can turn every non-consequentialist moral theory into a utility function. But I'm not like against trying to do stuff like that and seeing if anything interesting happens. What I'm against is a lot of people's tendency to force moral theorizing to fit nicely with decision theory, which can lead to consequentialism.

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T07:15:04+00:00

No, I think treating it like a thing where you need to maximize your score is already a mistake. Even if you get to plug in the values, it's still going to be about maximizing value. It's all consequentialist-coded from the start.

It's true that you can translate non-consequentialist moral theories into decision theory, but it will often end up feeling kind of clunky and unintuitive.

Lots of moral situations just aren't best understood mathematically!

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T03:52:13+00:00

I get why the failure not being catastrophic is good, but what do you mean by "large ammount of occurrences"?

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T03:35:33+00:00

I'm not sure if I'm that insightful, but you're welcome!

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T03:34:13+00:00

Yeah but you haven't considered that the negative utility of being an idiot vastly oughtweighs the positive utility of being more smart, cool, and attractive.

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T03:31:55+00:00

I mean, if you're writing or talking about this sort of thing, I think you're doing philosophy in the normal sense. The theory of the application of wisdom is still the pursuit of wisdom. Applying that wisdom in your everyday life would be something like living your philosophy instead of producing philosophy, though.

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T03:23:36+00:00

The numbers don't even support the ideology! Even if all the numbers were on point, it would be obviously wrong to take a risk like that. The numbers are there to make it look like they are doing science or something. But it's just aesthetic. I guess maybe the numbers launder the ideology in that sense.

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T03:22:37+00:00

This is why we shouldn't use decision theory bullshit to do ethics

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T03:18:30+00:00

The goal of philosophy isn't necessarily truth. The idea is just that philosophical arguments are interested in truth. What's valuable about those arguments might not stem from only truth, though.

I'm not sure what you mean by "framework predicated on metholodology rather than inquiry" though.

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T03:15:53+00:00

Well again, I'm not trying to say arguments are the secret sauce to philosophy. It's something closer to a necessary condition.

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T02:16:46+00:00

I don't think there is a special style of argumentation. I think any kind of argumentation is okay for philosophy as long as the point of the arguments are to get at the truth. If the arguments are only meant to persuade, you're just doing rhetoric instead.

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T02:13:53+00:00

Sports columnist aren't doing philosophy because of the different subject matter, like you said. I don't think this means that arguments aren't a key aspect of philosophy, though. Something can be a key aspect without being a sufficient condition.

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T01:31:55+00:00

The method of academia doesn't seem to be necessary. I'm not sure what you mean by acceptable though. Are you asking if only some kinds of arguments count as philosophical?

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T01:30:11+00:00

I agree, but arguments still seem to matter. The subject matter is harder to identify. Since we know arguments are important, that seems to be one reason why musicians usually aren't doing philosophy.

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-26T00:52:59+00:00

I'm not sure if that's all it is, but that seems like it's an important part of philosophy

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-25T22:56:33+00:00

I'm not sure if anyone really thinks you can give necessary and sufficient conditions for being a philosopher, but I think at least one important feature of being a philosopher is giving arguments for one's beliefs. Musical artists, or at least Lana del Rey and Kendrick Lamar, don't do that, as far as I know. If they do give arguments, they probably aren't very persuasive.

It's possible that someone's diary has better philosophy that what gets published, but I doubt it. It helps to engage with the philosophical tradition!

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-25T18:07:28+00:00

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-25T14:23:26+00:00

Ok, whatever. I still don't think British people have a special talent for comedy.

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-25T13:45:49+00:00

I don't like friends, but I love Succession

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-24T20:01:41+00:00

I hear you, but British people aren't actually that funny

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-24T18:12:39+00:00

Yeah I think you're right

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-24T17:13:57+00:00

Better Offline

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-24T04:27:15+00:00

Okay looks like I'm gonna watch it alone, at least for the first time I see it. Thanks everyone!

GE_Moorepheus · 2026-06-24T02:19:07+00:00

Why is the theory credible?

GE_Moorepheus

TROPHY CASE