-- being new here, I have the feeling that for all of its love of applied utilitarian philosophy, this community is dissapointing in its lack of openness to other philosophical readings.
I understand that due to the recency and impact of events there is a work of mourning happening in this forum, and proposing healthy paths for this , if possible, is important to those who have belonged and formed affinities and conversations. The trajectory change has already happened, it just may not be recognizable yet.
--being new here, I have the feeling that for all of its love of applied utilitarian philosophy, this community is dissapointing in its lack of openness to other philosophical readings
I think this is a bit like saying, “[Link to avocado salad recipe.] For all its love of cookies, this Sugar Appreciation Society is disappointing in its lack of openness to other foods.”
We’re not only about utilitarianism, sure. A lot of us take moral uncertainty seriously. We realise that other philosophical traditions might be helpful in guiding us towards good rule/prudent utilitarian practices and providing us with inspiration in our personal lives outside of EA. Some of us have much stronger beliefs in other ethical theories than we do in utilitarianism.
But if a ‘trajectory change’ means that ‘EA’ on the whole stops resembling utilitarianism significantly more than other ethical theories, I personally wouldn’t consider that EA any more.
Perhaps it is more like saying that the Sugar Appreciation Society tends to have a certain blindness to 1. the effects of sugar (which in extreme cases may cause blindness) 2. the effects of appreciation or fanaticism or sweetness as a fetish or as a means of persuasion into a cause 3. The complex origins and history of sugar and its links to empire and exploitation.
But it is hard to not like SAS. As a non-SAS I am in awe of what has been built and discussed, and even of the openness that does exist which is greater than in other societies, and I am at fault for pointing towards its closedness when I am new, and prefer not to be as open about my love of sugar but engage in it perhaps less conciously than I would like, and also must acknowledge that sugar is everywhere.
But if SAS looks at itself in the mirror it wants to see only a sweet image. It that image changes, as it must, into a saltier or spicier one as it may as it engages with other perspectives, SAS may become unrecognizable, and may fear that, as one fears a ghost ?
Philosophers have perhaps struggled with these impossible questions before,
https://brill.com/view/journals/rip/26/1/article-p25_2.xml?language=en
-- being new here, I have the feeling that for all of its love of applied utilitarian philosophy, this community is dissapointing in its lack of openness to other philosophical readings.
I understand that due to the recency and impact of events there is a work of mourning happening in this forum, and proposing healthy paths for this , if possible, is important to those who have belonged and formed affinities and conversations. The trajectory change has already happened, it just may not be recognizable yet.
I think this is a bit like saying, “[Link to avocado salad recipe.] For all its love of cookies, this Sugar Appreciation Society is disappointing in its lack of openness to other foods.”
We’re not only about utilitarianism, sure. A lot of us take moral uncertainty seriously. We realise that other philosophical traditions might be helpful in guiding us towards good rule/prudent utilitarian practices and providing us with inspiration in our personal lives outside of EA. Some of us have much stronger beliefs in other ethical theories than we do in utilitarianism.
But if a ‘trajectory change’ means that ‘EA’ on the whole stops resembling utilitarianism significantly more than other ethical theories, I personally wouldn’t consider that EA any more.
Perhaps it is more like saying that the Sugar Appreciation Society tends to have a certain blindness to 1. the effects of sugar (which in extreme cases may cause blindness) 2. the effects of appreciation or fanaticism or sweetness as a fetish or as a means of persuasion into a cause 3. The complex origins and history of sugar and its links to empire and exploitation.
But it is hard to not like SAS. As a non-SAS I am in awe of what has been built and discussed, and even of the openness that does exist which is greater than in other societies, and I am at fault for pointing towards its closedness when I am new, and prefer not to be as open about my love of sugar but engage in it perhaps less conciously than I would like, and also must acknowledge that sugar is everywhere.
But if SAS looks at itself in the mirror it wants to see only a sweet image. It that image changes, as it must, into a saltier or spicier one as it may as it engages with other perspectives, SAS may become unrecognizable, and may fear that, as one fears a ghost ?