The trolley problem is a litmus test for finding your ethical system. I've long tended toward deontology. More recently I'm looking at virtue ethics but I still at the moment identify as a deontologist. just because you let the trolley problem mislead you into some form of ontological ethics doesn't mean that you got the right answer. it means that it taught you about yourself.
I'm going to vote for who I want to win. I'm not going to vote for someone I think is evil to any degree.
If your method of voting is to choose the best person you can imagine, rather than someone who has an actual chance of winning, why vote for any candidate? Why not just write-in vote for Superman? Surely he is less evil than any candidate on the ballot.
Voting is like a game with rules. Sometime you simply can't win. But if you want the best outcome for the game you need to pick the strategy that leads to that outcome. Folding your arms and refusing to change your strategy when your preferred outcome has no chance of success ensures that the people actually playing the game will have it their way. Demanding nothing but the absolute best to earn your vote, and thus not voting for someone with a chance, is statistically identical to supporting the worse evil. It's sheer foolishness.
This kind of purity contest accomplishes nothing but shooting yourself in the foot. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
it's not a purity contest. I'm not going to vote for someone who I don't want to win.
The trolley problem is a litmus test for finding your ethical system. I've long tended toward deontology. More recently I'm looking at virtue ethics but I still at the moment identify as a deontologist. just because you let the trolley problem mislead you into some form of ontological ethics doesn't mean that you got the right answer. it means that it taught you about yourself.
I'm going to vote for who I want to win. I'm not going to vote for someone I think is evil to any degree.
If your method of voting is to choose the best person you can imagine, rather than someone who has an actual chance of winning, why vote for any candidate? Why not just write-in vote for Superman? Surely he is less evil than any candidate on the ballot.
Voting is like a game with rules. Sometime you simply can't win. But if you want the best outcome for the game you need to pick the strategy that leads to that outcome. Folding your arms and refusing to change your strategy when your preferred outcome has no chance of success ensures that the people actually playing the game will have it their way. Demanding nothing but the absolute best to earn your vote, and thus not voting for someone with a chance, is statistically identical to supporting the worse evil. It's sheer foolishness.
This kind of purity contest accomplishes nothing but shooting yourself in the foot. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
it's not a purity contest. I'm not going to vote for someone who I don't want to win.