I’m taking what you said literally under the core idea, that there are no other foundational rules. But perhaps comparison of different actions is not considered foundational. How would the framework compare/rank different outcomes or actions?
For example, how would it compare two actions involving involuntary imposition?
Or if an action involves one involuntary imposition (immoral) but also one voluntary assistance (moral), what does that imply overall? Is it always considered immoral, or does it depend on the extent of the imposition relative to the assistance?
that’s just a brief overview (which is says in the last paragraph) there is a significant amount more to it listed on the site linked at the bottom, which answers all of those types of surface level questions
I’m taking what you said literally under the core idea, that there are no other foundational rules. But perhaps comparison of different actions is not considered foundational. How would the framework compare/rank different outcomes or actions?
For example, how would it compare two actions involving involuntary imposition?
Or if an action involves one involuntary imposition (immoral) but also one voluntary assistance (moral), what does that imply overall? Is it always considered immoral, or does it depend on the extent of the imposition relative to the assistance?
that’s just a brief overview (which is says in the last paragraph) there is a significant amount more to it listed on the site linked at the bottom, which answers all of those types of surface level questions