Skip to main content

A Certain Type of Choice

Image result for whisky shots

There's a certain type of choice that plays a big role in the thinking of a certain type of ethicist. Its a motivational conflict, in a "resistance to temptation" (R2T) context.

I really want to do X. Perhaps it has been my lifelong habit to do X every morning. I only recently gave up, or tried to give up, on X. Yet the temptation to X now and then still recurs and must be resisted.

At a given moment I either succumb, or I find some non-X diversion and my thoughts thankfully move elsewhere.

My question for today: just how important is R2T. Is it paradigmatic, or is it a side issue? Has it been overemphasized, or the reverse?


Labels:

Comments

  1. HenryFebruary 23, 2018 at 4:12 AM

    What does resistance to temptation have to do with ethics? Ethics applies to a person's conduct that affects the well-being of other sentience beings. Only in some cases does resistance to temptation affect others, and, when it does, it does so indirectly. For example, an alcoholic's resistance to alcohol may benefit the people with whom he lives.

    As for your question, the importance of R2T must be assessed relative to something else, or as part of a whole. As stated, the question has no meaning unless a something-else or a whole exists that you have not stated.

    ReplyDelete
  2. ChristopherFebruary 23, 2018 at 9:49 AM

    This is a further discussion of the kind of thing I had in mind, though as usual I was too lazy to explain: http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~jessegra/papers/MMDOMDG.Self-control%20and%20binding%20morality.JPSP.2017.pdf

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti
7 comments
Read more

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers
Post a Comment
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak
13 comments
Read more