tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post6667867363418346095..comments2023-10-14T09:40:06.690-05:00Comments on Jean Kazez: Tiny EthicsJean Kazezhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00592593002719828153noreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-55515711159493575812010-01-12T18:01:50.880-06:002010-01-12T18:01:50.880-06:00Ha--you'll never be a "type 4 commenter.&...Ha--you'll never be a "type 4 commenter." I'm actually thinking of subjecting a class to The Oreo Problem (an instant classic). I like the way nobody starts off with much of an opinion about it, but all kinds of moral reasoning emerge as you think about it. It's pleasantly trivial too... and I've always liked Oreos.Jean Kazezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00592593002719828153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-73023557264958820422010-01-12T17:34:43.426-06:002010-01-12T17:34:43.426-06:00I completely agree that there is this sense that i...I completely agree that there is this sense that if you accept my metaethics that it creates justification for relativity among communities. But I don't think it changes anything. Pro-life Christians have already dug in their heels on abortion, no matter what arguments you present. They've dug in their heels, in part because of their particular brand of moral realism (God is real and he Faustnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-39159304973536057202010-01-12T16:05:36.822-06:002010-01-12T16:05:36.822-06:00Faust, Stretches of reasoning really can be defici...Faust, Stretches of reasoning really can be deficient in logic, fact, etc...whether some community finds them appealing or not. Surely that's the way it seems to people when they are actually engaged in the back and forth of debate. Some points sink, others swim. I worry that someone armed with your metaethics would have an excuse to dig in their heals and just "accept or not accept&Jean Kazezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00592593002719828153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-47080794399755994152010-01-12T14:22:02.478-06:002010-01-12T14:22:02.478-06:00I think that for lack of new terminology, we are ...I think that for lack of new terminology, we are forced to see non-human relationships, those with big business in human terms.<br />Let's take another example: I am traveling through the Bolivian countryside, no town in sight, but I lodge for the night in the cottage of a peasant, who charges me 10 dollars for a room and breakfast. In the morning I find that he has placed a bottle s. wallersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448905469871566228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-77638063308342978172010-01-12T14:17:35.319-06:002010-01-12T14:17:35.319-06:00I don't think ethical justification is a perso...I don't think ethical justification is a personal matter. I think it's a sociological matter. One is always justifying one's behavior to other people. <br /><br />I think ethical <i>commitment</i> is a personal matter. <br /><br />So you decide what kind of ethics you are commited to and you justify that ethics to various communitites. <br /><br />Personally I think I can accept that Faustnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-43833174901555643482010-01-12T11:38:12.262-06:002010-01-12T11:38:12.262-06:00Re: the "factory" in factory farming. No...Re: the "factory" in factory farming. No, not too much about capitalism, commodification, etc., in my book.Jean Kazezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00592593002719828153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-7203919863379026082010-01-12T11:36:43.748-06:002010-01-12T11:36:43.748-06:00I am picturing myself staying in a hotel with in-r...I am picturing myself staying in a hotel with in-room minibars. I didn't object to capitalism and high costs, etc., when I booked the room, so I surely cannot start griping about capitalism and high costs when I open the minibar. It would just be a rationalization. (And the same rationalization would allow me to grab the oreos in the store and bring in cheap replacements later on.) <br /><Jean Kazezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00592593002719828153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-83139998874250674002010-01-12T11:17:24.984-06:002010-01-12T11:17:24.984-06:00Agh, where did all that come from? I've made n...<i>Agh, where did all that come from? I've made no general claims about the economy, etc. etc.</i><br /><br />I think that all of this stuff exists as background assuptions. Incidently this is where I think metaethics inveitably rears it's ugly head. As you note in the following paragraph it has to do with what constitutes "adequate justification." <br /><br /><i>You said the Faustnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-12587764299543715952010-01-12T07:23:09.838-06:002010-01-12T07:23:09.838-06:00We may have to go through this whole debate again,...We may have to go through this whole debate again, because rtk does ask a good question--<br /><br />WHAT IF IT WERE FIG NEWTONS?Jean Kazeznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-88635261786585414442010-01-11T16:00:58.463-06:002010-01-11T16:00:58.463-06:00I never agreed that it is ethically wrong to take ...I never agreed that it is ethically wrong to take and replace in the costly hotel store. I simply said that the person who did it was going to end up in jail, and thus, it is not wise to do it. And while I agreed with you that in contemporary society, sellers determine the price: I never agreed that that is an ethically correct situation. Quite the contrary, I've argued that s. wallersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448905469871566228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-73795427692921433572010-01-11T15:28:10.560-06:002010-01-11T15:28:10.560-06:00Agh, where did all that come from? I've made ...Agh, where did all that come from? I've made no general claims about the economy, etc. etc.<br /><br />You said the exorbitant cost of the oreos was reason enough to "take and replace." I was merely trying to examine that belief. If that's right, then it also ought to be true that we can "take and replace" in the costly hotel store. But we can't. So the Jean Kazezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00592593002719828153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-9874489201883066052010-01-11T14:55:24.851-06:002010-01-11T14:55:24.851-06:00We have such a radically different vision of how a...We have such a radically different vision of how a contemporary capitalist economy functions that I find it difficult to discuss this issue. You see the primary goal of the economy as providing services; I see the primary goal as making a profit, the highest possible profit, and maximizing stock prices. You see the economy as not only legitimate but also morally justified; I see it as s. wallersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448905469871566228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-21635897657475444462010-01-11T12:50:36.975-06:002010-01-11T12:50:36.975-06:00So just to be clear:
If there is a sign on the mi...So just to be clear:<br /><br />If there is a sign on the minibar that says the following:<br /><br />"Removal of items constitutes purchase. There is no return policy on these items." <br /><br />Then I accept that it is wrong to replace the items with anything else. In fact it is wrong to take the items out and put them back.Faustnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-47462659402409323442010-01-11T12:45:56.059-06:002010-01-11T12:45:56.059-06:00I agree. In fact this is codified in some business...I agree. In fact this is codified in some business practices:<br /><br />Example: my friend just bought a laptop. A couple days after he bought it, the price dropped $100 because they introduced a new laptop line. He requested that refund the price. They accept this. Why? Because by contract he can return it and buy it back for $100 cheaper. <br /><br />Not quite the same but whenever there are Faustnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-78602741324305134462010-01-11T12:21:51.393-06:002010-01-11T12:21:51.393-06:00I think it's not quite the same. It just invo...I think it's not quite the same. It just involves part of the original problem--the part about deception. It doesn't bring up the same issues about goods vs. services. If you just replace the oreos, you never pay for the minibar service. If you return the replacement-video to store X, it doesn't seem as if there's any issue of not paying for services. There's a deception Jean Kazezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00592593002719828153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-15599267703645698742010-01-11T11:34:03.209-06:002010-01-11T11:34:03.209-06:00Interesting comment on David Lat's site:
When...Interesting comment on David Lat's site:<br /><br />When I was a kid, I bought a video game at store X. A week later, I found out that store Y has the same game for $10 less. Alas, I had already opened the game and store X did not accept returns on opened video games.<br /><br /><i>I went to store Y and bought the same game at store Y's price. Then I took the unopened game to store X and Faustnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-89186063689094333722010-01-11T10:12:09.838-06:002010-01-11T10:12:09.838-06:00The Zeno's arrow paradox of triviality? Is the...The Zeno's arrow paradox of triviality? Is there a point at which something becomes so trivial you hit the target anyway? <br /><br />I don't distinguish on the basis of triviality myself. If it's wrong to do (by my lights), then it's not trivial (to me). <br /><br />Indeed, as Jean suggests, on one view an accumulation of these Oreo trivialities will mean the death of the minibarFaustnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-38010471813127126452010-01-11T10:09:52.995-06:002010-01-11T10:09:52.995-06:00I think there is an analogy between stealing music...I think there is an analogy between stealing music because the price is too high and the Oreo's too.<br /><br />People are focusing on simply the value of the object that they are purchasing, without considering all of the other things that they are paying for when they buy the service.<br /><br />When I buy a CD, I'm not just paying the musician and (the apparently more objectionable) Waynehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627147979307495870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-36371472207677388592010-01-11T09:41:50.349-06:002010-01-11T09:41:50.349-06:00People leave restaurants without paying all the ti...People leave restaurants without paying all the time. They also shoplift (without getting caught) all the time. In any event, the issues about getting caught don't seem to go to the heart of whether doing X is justifiable or not.Jean Kazezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00592593002719828153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-88300844973638412342010-01-11T09:27:24.122-06:002010-01-11T09:27:24.122-06:00You originally talked about a restaurant, and I do...You originally talked about a restaurant, and I don't see how you can leave a restaurant without paying, simply because the owner will call the police. The same is true in an expensive store. It is impossible to take goods out of a store, without the owner calling the police. Furthermore, why would someone in the real-world run the risk of taking something out of a store and then s. wallersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448905469871566228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-15171303059539248352010-01-11T09:17:11.649-06:002010-01-11T09:17:11.649-06:00I didn't talk about replacement in the restaur...I didn't talk about replacement in the restaurant bill case. I just said if "the price is too high" is a legitimate consideration, it will lead to justifications of all sorts of things.<br /><br />My example of taking things from the expensive hotel store and later replacing them is perfectly realistic. Why it would be OK to do this in the minibar case, but not in the case of the Jean Kazezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00592593002719828153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-50222769029206323592010-01-11T09:06:03.718-06:002010-01-11T09:06:03.718-06:00I don't have a handy list of things justified ...I don't have a handy list of things justified by the fact that a price is too high. However, the fact that a price is too high does justify certain behaviors, for example, replacement in the hotel room, that a fair price does not justify. It does not justify stealing, in my opinion, except in life and death situations. Your example of eating something in an overpriced s. wallersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448905469871566228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-35092455988670095552010-01-11T08:41:10.988-06:002010-01-11T08:41:10.988-06:00Amos, I really don't think I'm distorting ...Amos, I really don't think I'm distorting your position. Here's what you wrote--<br /><br />"One of the things at issue here is just that: whether it is ethically correct for a seller to charge an outrageous price and what should be the response of the consumer in the case of an outrageous price."<br /><br />You're using the thought that the price is too high to justify Jean Kazeznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-39976301768103729372010-01-11T08:12:55.887-06:002010-01-11T08:12:55.887-06:00Jean: You're distorting my position and the ...Jean: You're distorting my position and the position of the man who replaced the cookies. I never said that one is justified in taking the goods (shoplifting) when the price is too high (except in certain "life and death" situations which don't apply here). I said that one is justified in replacing the goods.s. wallersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448905469871566228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-85372611003064383412010-01-11T08:05:50.526-06:002010-01-11T08:05:50.526-06:00If you're going to make the argument that you ...If you're going to make the argument that you don't have to pay because the price is too high, then you do have to consider whether you can underpay restaurant bills that are too high, shoplift at stores where the prices are too high, etc. "The price is too high" is rarely a good reason for taking goods without paying the price, so I can't see how it could be a good reason Jean Kazeznoreply@blogger.com