A few preliminaries and then a general reaction. First, no need to reiterate that the world is complicated. Second, your response to the insurance example suggests to me that you’re unfamiliar with the use of this heuristic in political philosophy and political science. 1/
Your objections to the insurance heuristic just aren’t salient. (I can’t cover it on Twitter; it takes me about 1-2 hours of class time. But my favorite articulation of the model is found in Dworkin’s ‘Sovereign Virtue’.) 2/
Third, in presenting an abstract model, I don’t owe you all the nitty-gritty details of public policy. I owe you some details, sure. But I don’t claim to know who will be head Dog Catcher of Flagstaff, AZ in the year 2032. I just don’t. That’s not part of any model. 3/
Some details will be sorted out by theorists, some by policy experts and regulators. And some specifics will need to be sorted out within our political community as a part of the democratic process.
Finally, the fact that it’s difficult to reach agreement on the truth about justice or which laws best conform to that truth is totally irrelevant. This is a * normative * debate. Not sure why you brought up disagreement.
I follow everything you’re saying about details and disagreement, etc. I just don’t know why you’re saying it. None of it is relevant.
Here’s my general reaction. I’m not trying to ‘bind the conscience’ of anyone. I’m telling you the objective truth about justice, and saying: 7/
As a believer, I’d rather give something that I don’t owe than withhold something that I owe. That comes out of my basic sense for what it means to be a follower of Christ. And that’s why I think that the insurance heuristic should appeal to Christians. 8/
In these sorts of conversations, I’m often struck by the sense of entitlement that I see from people who claim the name of Christ. 9/
As a follower of Christ, I’m not called to assert my rights. Christ doesn’t call me to say, “But what if I don’t technically owe you anything?” That’s nonsense. And if my saying so binds someone’s conscience, so be it. 10/
Don’t misunderstand. I’m not saying that we should turn the government into a charity. 11/
Rather, I’m saying that we should advocate for public policies that conform to the truth about justice; and Christians should have a charitable spirit in approaching the question of what the truth about justice is. 12/end
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to 𝕤𝕔𝕠𝕥𝕥 𝕞 𝕔𝕠𝕝𝕖𝕪
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!