Thank you sharing this. I think there’s also value in having as an outcome of moral argument not only persuasion, but if that’s not possible, at least a more productive disagreement. You may have clarified where you *really* disagree, what each has misunderstood, or how deeply the commitments go.
Thanks for sharing this. I was discussing recently about how public health need to find that common ground between what we want and the underlying need (not want) of the community. Many years ago, there was a community in my country where they killed anyone with sicke cell disease because they thought they were possessed with evil spirit. Their need (getting rid of evil contamination) was genuine but their means was wrong (killing children). Public health aligns with their need but not their means. We can therefore communicate with them at the need level. There are medical solutions to getting rid of "evil spirit." This is probably a better gospel to preach to get cooperation
Moral arguments are very important. However, moral arguments only work with moral people who have a sense of decency; and even then, some peoples' values may override the values underlying the moral argument. Of course, some people are amoral and others just plain evil. Some enjoy being cruel and take pleasure in harming others they see as less than. So yeah. Moral arguments are important, but there are limitations.
Thank you sharing this. I think there’s also value in having as an outcome of moral argument not only persuasion, but if that’s not possible, at least a more productive disagreement. You may have clarified where you *really* disagree, what each has misunderstood, or how deeply the commitments go.
Thanks for sharing this. I was discussing recently about how public health need to find that common ground between what we want and the underlying need (not want) of the community. Many years ago, there was a community in my country where they killed anyone with sicke cell disease because they thought they were possessed with evil spirit. Their need (getting rid of evil contamination) was genuine but their means was wrong (killing children). Public health aligns with their need but not their means. We can therefore communicate with them at the need level. There are medical solutions to getting rid of "evil spirit." This is probably a better gospel to preach to get cooperation
Your best essay that I have read. Thank you for your thoughtful exploration of moving from ideology to partnership.
Moral arguments are very important. However, moral arguments only work with moral people who have a sense of decency; and even then, some peoples' values may override the values underlying the moral argument. Of course, some people are amoral and others just plain evil. Some enjoy being cruel and take pleasure in harming others they see as less than. So yeah. Moral arguments are important, but there are limitations.
Wow---I love this term "moral bullying" and more so the use of it in the title -- it packs the entire essay in one term.