Philosophy

[bryant]

The philosophy selector test says I'm a Randist, which was expected given the tenor of the questions. There's a bug in the test, though; it doesn't get into the question of whether or not it's moral to be charitable. I think the assumption is that acting in one's own self-interest implies you won't be helping others much, which is a terribly Randist assumption, come to think of it.

Pah! Where's Rawls when you need him?

Comments

[enmascarado.livejournal.com]

I think that the assumption of the test is that if you belive in working for your self-interest than any charitable help is to make yourself look and/or feel good.
_Dan

[bryant]

Yeah, I agree -- whereas my own personal set of morals has me providing charitable help either because a) I get something out of the institution I'm giving money to (theater companies, museums) or b) because I am aware that I might someday need charity and I like living in a society in which people help those who can't help themselves.

Neither of these, I think, can be described as Randist.

btw, hope you don't mind me adding you to my friends list. I followed the hi virus to you, and I'm a wrestling fan whose friends don't always understand why I'd like something so lowbrow, so...

[enmascarado.livejournal.com]

I actually figured out you got to me via theHi when I visited your page. No problem adding me to your friends list, I only ask that you tell me why, but you already did.

The best wrestling isn't low-brow... although it's still low-art.
-Dan