Tweet

Contingently Ironist

2 Dec, 4 tweets, 3 min read

@Jeffrey_Howard_

@Jeffrey_Howard_ @FreihandDenker "There doesn't appear to be any..completely moral action."

It's much more than that.

"Anything can be made to look good or bad..by being redescribed." -- Rorty

So ANY action can be redescribed as moral or immoral.

When that sinks in, the contingency of morality is staggering.

@Jeffrey_Howard_

@Jeffrey_Howard_ @FreihandDenker Examples:

Eating an apple. The ultimate sin.

Sacrificing your son. The ultimate act of faith.

😉

@Jeffrey_Howard_

@Jeffrey_Howard_ @FreihandDenker BTW, Rorty wasn't the first to make this claim about redescription. I'm collecting such claims. I've only found two other so far:

1) "I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for

@Jeffrey_Howard_

@Jeffrey_Howard_ @FreihandDenker that person it is unclean." — Romans 14:14

2) "... for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." — William Shakespeare, Hamlet. Act II, scene ii 245

Pretty good company, I'd say! Always on the lookout for more examples.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

More from @ironick

Contingently Ironist

@ironick

16 Oct

@Jeffrey_Howard_

@Jeffrey_Howard_ @JonAlanSchmidt @Mookmonster30 @FerraraKev @CSPeirceSpeaks Sorry to jump in late, but I think in his "Reply to Ramberg" (mentioned in your excellent recent podcast) Rorty partially recanted the sentiment expressed in "Truth is simply a compliment…": “Ramberg sets me straight here too. He tells me, in effect, that _it was a mistake /1

@Jeffrey_Howard_

@Jeffrey_Howard_ @JonAlanSchmidt @Mookmonster30 @FerraraKev @CSPeirceSpeaks on my part_ to go from criticism of attempts to define truth as accurate representation of the intrinsic nature of reality to _a denial that true statements get things right_. What I should have done, he makes me realize, is to grant Davidson's point that _most of our beliefs /2

@Jeffrey_Howard_

@Jeffrey_Howard_ @JonAlanSchmidt @Mookmonster30 @FerraraKev @CSPeirceSpeaks about anything_ (snow, molecules, the moral law) must be true of that thing - _must get that thing right_.” p374

In his reply, Rorty clarified what he means by "true of". He does so by more fully embracing and explicating Davidson’s triangulation: ‘Since I now want to agree /3

Read 17 tweets

Contingently Ironist

@ironick

15 Jun

Prediction: The #SCOTUS ruling in #Bostock will become the central case in law school classes teaching the meaning of "but-for" causation. The entire decision comes down to applying but-for causation analysis! /1

'In the language of law, this means that Title VII’s “because of ” test incorporates the “‘simple’” and “traditional” standard of but-for causation. Nassar, 570 U. S., at 346, 360. That form of causation is established whenever a particular outcome...' /1

'...would not have happened “but for” the purported cause. See Gross, 557 U. S., at 176. In other words, a but-for test directs us to change one thing at a time and see if the outcome changes. If it does, we have found a but-for cause.

This can be a sweeping standard. ...' /2

Read 6 tweets

Contingently Ironist

@ironick

14 Nov 18

@ibmdesign

Best jargon-free description of #designthinking approach we applied at @ibmdesign … by @mjane_h at @autodesk: To advocate for investment, we don’t start by rationalizing the things we need to do. We start with a vision of what designing and making can feel like to our users. /1

That vision opens with a single, powerful statement that the business can rally around, with a few supporting points to make it visceral and visual. When we’ve done this well, business leaders see their own strategic intent in what we’ve presented. /2

The discussion turns to unpacking possibilities for what strategic intent might be like from this point of view. Only then, when leadership feels it too, do we introduce the areas of investment we request. /3

Read 4 tweets

Support us! We are indie developers!

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

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/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!

Share this page!

Contingently Ironist

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @ironick

Contingently Ironist

Contingently Ironist

Contingently Ironist

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Like this author's thread?