Total Members Voted: 29
No, they really don't. You co-opt what the other person gas been arguing and say you agree.
"Note to all alcoholics..."is not a statement of what an alcoholic would do, it is a warning with a prescription of what they should do - that is policy
Quote from: One Step Ahead on March 16, 2007, 12:26:17 PM"Note to all alcoholics..."is not a statement of what an alcoholic would do, it is a warning with a prescription of what they should do - that is policy OK, then I guess we have different definitions of "policy." For me, "policy" is a rule that a decisionmaker in charge of others decides to implement in order to change the behavior of said others. I wouldn't impose, as a policy, a rule that people should never turn themselves in if they wouldn't get caught otherwise. But given current incentives, I don't think that any rational person should do so. For me, "policy" is never individual unless qualified by the word "personal." Thus, it might be my personal policy not to turn myself in if it's not in my best interest, and I think that would also be the personal policy of most rational people. But I don't use the general term "policy" in that way. Therefore, I advocate utilitarianism for policy decisions, but not for your personal policy decisions.EDIT: re the entry above: exactly. I go with definition 2(b). 2(a) is too broad for my purposes.