pull down to refresh

80 sats \ 3 replies \ @SimpleStacker 20 May \ on: Repugnant Economics BooksAndArticles econ

Is he coming at it from the perspective of dismissing repugnance as an unneeded constraint that we need to rid ourselves of, or from the angle that human morality should be respected even if you don't necessarily agree with all its aspects?

write
compose
64 sats \ 2 replies \ @SimpleStacker 20 May

Because imo the more economists dismiss moral concerns as something illegitimate to be dismissed, or more charitably, "navigated around", or "reframed" as the article suggests, the more annoyed I get with them.

reply
100 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 20 May

The general vibe amongst our peers is definitely that repugnance is dumb and anachronistic.

I’m probably somewhere between you and the median on that. I do think we should be more open to reexamining cultural taboos but also less arrogantly dismissive of them.

reply
73 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 20 May

To me it's cool to question them and question inconsistencies. I just think the tone matters, and also the whole "oh we just have to trick them around it" attitude is pretty smarmy.

reply