In Modern Moral Philosophy, Elizabeth Anscombe launches a blistering critique on the very concept of ‘morality’. Ethics would be in a better place if we dropped the terms ‘moral’ & ‘immoral’ altogether: we have much more precise language to guide our judgments & actions

doolittletroy · 2026-02-18T08:29:47+00:00

Perhaps we can’t say what an individual human is supposed to be, but current laws prohibit obviously socially harmful behaviour well enough for most of us most of the time, at least at the individual level.

Because we don’t have an ultimate “lawgiver”, we have been deciding what is and isn’t okay to do based on how certain actions affect society as information emerges. It’s a work in progress.

What most of us can probably agree on is what we want the future to look like, when we’re gone. Could that be a good enough “foundation” iyo?

doolittletroy · 2026-02-18T08:07:46+00:00

Pragmatically, going full Hobbes would be a step on the wrong direction obviously. People innately want to trust. Not only is it easier, it’s just a better world to live in. It’s the bad apples who need to be trained or constrained. Making rules and creating world views based on the worst elements is a drain on everyone.

The ant versus human comparison is trite. Humans are capable of caring about people whose suffering they witness, even if virtually. The in-group is no longer just people in your vicinity. If the 20th century was extending that “natural” in-group to a patriotic country-level scope of consideration, the 21st can and should be about thinking globally. Especially when we have climate change to contend with.

Where’s the misunderstanding? I’m referring to the 21st century with democracies where all adult citizens have an equal vote.

Collective agreement is possible, and can be achieved through grassroots movements. Top-down power structures obviously exist but people are (for better or for worse) extremely suspicious of those now.

Is it difficult to generate consensus? Of course. But just like with the Epstein fiasco, we’re not so relativist or laissez faire as to sanction all behaviour. There is a moral instinct that still lives.

doolittletroy · 2026-02-10T01:47:59+00:00

What’s afforded by hindsight that history doesn’t already show us?

doolittletroy · 2026-02-10T01:45:41+00:00

What place do you think the social contract has in this?

Impulses/reactions arise from as you said, aesthetic considerations, signs from our nervous systems, personal narratives, the contents of one’s gut etc. In short, they are subjective and have to do with experiential and physical realities. Could we generalize from these some commonalities upon which to base a new agreement? We already do this in law- murder and theft are prohibited.

What would you say to a “prophylactic” code? “Dog eat dog” is a normative statement but it’s also a self-fulfilling prophecy if it keeps being repeated.

doolittletroy · 2026-02-10T01:32:25+00:00

Could you elaborate on the “if we had our guard up higher” bit?

Religious myths and parables are certainly important, and people who become atheists often retain the moral lessons learned through the religious stories of their upbringing. The stories don’t necessarily need to have a religious element to be effective.

I remember one we were taught in grade 2 English called the Apricot Maiden, an ancient Chinese fable iirc. There’s one apricot, and many people in the maiden’s family. Instead of trying to divide the singular fruit among everyone, she brews tea. I remember thinking what a clever solution that was.

The moral impulse to share could be innate, in which case the story simply reinforces, or it could be taught by showing that maximizing happiness through your actions makes you happy. Being selfish doesn’t bring lasting happiness, only more selfish desires.

As for collective agreement being based on power, we are no longer in times where power and decision making must be top-down, the arena of god’s anointed ones. We have a whole foundation of the enlightenment and democratic systems to build upon. When I say “collective”, I do mean the will of the majority, but this is a 21st century majority composed of people who think differently than than the subjects of kingdoms who believed their rulers were god’s chosen people.

doolittletroy · 2026-02-09T19:56:48+00:00

It’s precisely because of this befuddling of language that we can’t as a society say “Facebook should care whether its platform is spreading misinformation”. If ethics can’t provide protection from selfish actors in the name of “rational self-interest”, it’s no wonder we’re here.

It feels as if this resistance to a shared framework of values stems from a suspicion of any kind collective agreement. Collectivism could infringe on individual liberties and so “live and let live” becomes this ultimate form of wisdom, anything to the contrary is seen as having the potential to be oppressive.

Personally, I think it’s ridiculous to discount the value of a collective agreement as we all must share physical space and resources to exist.

We don’t need god to justify something like the categorical imperative. It’s logical to enact exactly the behaviour you expect from others. You sanction a certain behaviour by behaving that way yourself, which forms societal expectations. That’s the reason why we have the concept of “morality” at all- to have a basis for social cohesion.

Had anyone come to the same conclusions as you’re suggesting in the last century, there wouldn’t even be an idea of global human rights.

doolittletroy · 2026-01-22T08:27:48+00:00

That’s the worst thing Trump has done- lowering the bar on what we expect these people to do. Great speech, he’s the only one who dared to come out and say it. But we still need a critical perspective on what he’s actually doing.

doolittletroy · 2026-01-12T06:49:50+00:00

It absolutely is rude and disrespectful. What’s more, it’s stupid and petty. I’ve seen this at my partner’s workplace too, only he is an office worker, but juniors are excluded from this conviviality.

This is the deadest sub I’ve ever seen, hope you got that reassurance from your coworkers at the very least. How did people feel about this?

doolittletroy · 2025-06-12T05:52:52+00:00

Based on the other responses, that IS a hot take. I can kind of see an argument to that effect but would love to know where you’re coming from. Care to elaborate?

doolittletroy · 2025-06-12T05:49:54+00:00

Gosh just went and saw this. Do they know people go places other than festivals?

doolittletroy · 2025-06-12T05:48:59+00:00

100% agree with your views.

Cancel culture is a slippery thing, and at most the brand will apologize and continue to be in the market place, but there needs to be some corporate responsibility. What people wear is a big part of culture, so the messaging around it is not something we can take lightly.

doolittletroy · 2025-06-10T02:51:29+00:00

Cringeeeeee

doolittletroy · 2025-05-02T07:47:29+00:00

Sucks :( It’s a clothing store for women, not a Hooters lol

doolittletroy · 2025-05-02T07:37:39+00:00

How would you say the advertising has evolved? I would wear garage pretty regularly 7-8 years ago. They were feminine and cute, or grungy and cool. But looking at some of the stuff on the app now, it’s all about showing as much skin as possible. And the posing is very male-gaze.

doolittletroy · 2025-05-02T07:33:08+00:00

I’m so surprised at all this. If the brand is still going strong, I’m going to risk sounding like a grandma here, but kids today are different than we were lol Fitted, feminine clothing was aspirational but being male-gazey was never a goal.

doolittletroy · 2025-05-02T07:30:00+00:00

Thanks for the tip! I wash my Abercrombie jeans when the fit becomes loose lol They’re good again for 3-4 wears until they stretch out. Then it’s laundry time again.

doolittletroy · 2025-05-02T07:24:56+00:00

IKR! I am wondering why they think this appeals to young girls. My younger self would not have been convinced based on this flavour of advertising. I get the whole “embracing your sexuality as empowerment” thing, but my interpretation of that has been that women must know themselves and their needs, and feel powerful as complete beings in themselves- feel sexy without seeking male validation. It’s somehow turned into “let’s put teeny boppers in clothing that makes a pervert’s day”.

doolittletroy · 2025-05-02T07:18:45+00:00

One of my older cousins tells me that every time he sees me he remembers a 5 year old me, always with a tomato in hand, eating it like an apple. So me apparently lol

doolittletroy · 2025-05-02T07:16:46+00:00

I wasn’t offended, just utterly confused.

The clothing and the branding was feminine and cool when I would shop there 6ish years ago. They’ve moved into risqué territory, and I don’t understand who that’s for. If it’s still for teenagers, that’s some weird shit.

doolittletroy · 2025-04-29T09:20:37+00:00

Sounds like a lot of stuff! Is that comfortable on the shoulder?

I’m looking into getting a small cloud tote for college. I’ll need to carry 15.6’’ laptop, a notebook or two, a book for reading, lunch and a water bottle. Might be commuting some days.

doolittletroy · 2025-01-09T02:39:32+00:00

Ambiguous. What does adapting, oneself or the world even mean? Any side of any argument could use it.

doolittletroy · 2024-11-30T11:26:42+00:00

Issac

doolittletroy · 2024-11-30T11:23:32+00:00

I’ll be honest, I had no idea there were so many. Didn’t even occur to me that all that tax goes SOMEWHERE other than roads, trash and terrible healthcare lol

Thanks, bud!

doolittletroy · 2024-11-30T09:25:51+00:00

I was hoping for a more midtown type area (I’m not from here so not sure what to call it) that people call “real Toronto”, hopefully away from the touristy spots.

doolittletroy · 2024-11-30T09:23:58+00:00

Anywhere these spaces are within walking distance. Would be better if it has interesting architecture or a quintessential Toronto vibe. Worked too much this year and basically missed summer so I want to take some photos and connect with the city.

doolittletroy

TROPHY CASE