Murali

Bioethicist and Philosopher at the Centre for Biomedical Ethics, National University of Singapore. Public justification libertarian. Views my own.

[Murali @amurali284]

Memes my friends made of me when I was in panel at #wcb2024

[Murali @amurali284]

@jessespafford Where by strong sense I mean the kind that excludes libertarianism and classical liberalism

[Murali @amurali284]

@jessespafford I haven't read your book, but Brennan (and for that matter, myself) may argue that insofar as you show that your view only shows that egalitarianism in the weak sense (that includes libertarians) is required, it doesn't show that egalitarianism in the strong sense is required

[Murali @amurali284]

@jessespafford But isn't that simply because you ex ante accept some principle about the uniformity of the laws of nature? The moral correlate is that we ex ante accept a principle about the uniformity of the moral law

[Murali @amurali284]

@jessespafford Thanks Jesse for the reply. Why can't the libertarian say that what really matters is equal recognition respect and these then justify differences in wealth, welfare, advantage etc? Egalitarianism becomes completely trivial if this kind of libertarian counts as egalitarian too.

[Murali @amurali284]

@jessespafford But to have a default normative expectation of equality is exactly the thing we're trying to justify.

[Murali @amurali284]

@jessespafford 2. It's not clear that difference as such stands in need of explanation. Rather, it is some deviation from expectation that stands in need of explanation. If this is right then deviation from (normative) expectations also stands in need of justification.

[Murali @amurali284]

@worst_account Roughly, one may make a moral demand on another to not φ only if it is publicly justifiable that φ-ing will violate someone's rights. Quite plausibly, one may substitute this principle in place of the NAP to get quite a bit done.

[Murali @amurali284]

@worst_account A view I've become more sympathetic to, is an argument for libertarianism that combines public justification, "harm" principle and lockean accounts together with how moral powers like consent and trust work.

[Murali @amurali284]

@PAHoyeck There are pantheists, panentheists, monotheists, henotheists, monolatrists, and even polytheists among Hindus. While folk theology might lean towards the latter 3, the more orthodox beliefs especially among the priestly class will lean towards the first 3.

[Murali @amurali284]

@PAHoyeck A minor quibble: Hinduism is not (necessarily) polytheistic. This is because Hinduism is massively diverse and fragmented. Hindu practice ranges from seemingly polytheistic, to monolatry or even henotheistic. Meanwhile actual theological commitments run the whole gamut.

[Murali @amurali284]

@johnsmithyson0 I think we can generalize. Any libertarian man who is married to a woman who is moderate a whole bunch of issues will be more liberal than her on those issues.

[Murali @amurali284]

@johnsmithyson0 She is more law and order/restrictionist on borders, drugs speech etc.

[Murali @amurali284]

@PAHoyeck @bengrossbg @plk669888 By contrast, anglophone bioethicists, especially those who tend to work directly on more fundamental normative problems are more likely to be analytic philosophers than not.

[Murali @amurali284]

@PAHoyeck @bengrossbg @plk669888 *defended, not discussed.