Mindblown: a blog about philosophy.

^^^posting this thought as a comment (not an additional post) because it is relevant to the above (this post) and to recent related email and Zoom discussions on related topics^^^ HOW TO THINK OF (AND NOT TO THINK OF) FITTING-ATTITUDES STANDARDS AND TH…

In reply to mlyoung57. Yeah, I was hoping for “never.” LikeLike

In reply to Roderick T. Long. I was wondering when all this talk of desert would conjure the horse with no name. LikeLike

When someone (or something) deserves something, what sort of normative fact (property, condition) is this? Is this sort of normative fact determined by other sorts of normative facts (and, if so, which ones)? Is this sort of normative fact something that determines other sorts of normative facts (and, if so, which ones)? Here is something…

In reply to Roderick T. Long. Comment would be superfluous, in addition to being impossible. LikeLike

Given that a “diligence” is a stagecoach, this whole discussion is somewhat mysterious. Though I suppose a good diligence does deserve to make it across the desert. But if you lose the diligence, you can always fall back on the horse with…

In reply to Roderick T. Long. My criticism is written so as to cover either possibility you mention in your first paragraph. If you define the criteria for voter eligibility as Brennan does, it doesn’t matter whether he means a system that gives …

[…] of an intended aim, effort confers desert on the intended aim, not the unintended byproduct. To recycle an example I had used against Sher in an earlier post (but in a different context), nursing involves certain job-specific rewards, like pr…

[…] effort into “something,” except that that something consists of many things. I am, say, putting effort into cleaning an OR. Cleaning an OR has many different goals. So if I’m putting effort into “cleaning the […]…