What is your answer?
You can escape Hare's golden rule arguments by
{ 1 } - making only non-universalizable or non-prescriptive ought judgments.
{ 2 } - refusing to make ought judgments.
{ 3 } - accepting the reversed-situation treatment yourself.
{ 4 } - all of the above.
{ 5 } - none of the above -- there's no way to escape the argument.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 5.
1 is wrong. Please try again.
You can escape Hare's golden rule arguments by
{ 1 } - making only non-universalizable or non-prescriptive ought judgments.
{ 2 } - refusing to make ought judgments.
{ 3 } - accepting the reversed-situation treatment yourself.
{ 4 } - all of the above.
{ 5 } - none of the above -- there's no way to escape the argument.
Hare's GR consistency condition presumes that we're using "ought" in a way that is universalizable (to entail the same evaluation about an imagined reversed situation) and prescriptive (to entail the corresponding imperative).
But there are other ways of escape.
<= back | menu | forward =>
2 is wrong. Please try again.
You can escape Hare's golden rule arguments by
{ 1 } - making only non-universalizable or non-prescriptive ought judgments.
{ 2 } - refusing to make ought judgments.
{ 3 } - accepting the reversed-situation treatment yourself.
{ 4 } - all of the above.
{ 5 } - none of the above -- there's no way to escape the argument.
Hare's GR arguments test whether we're consistent in our moral judgments. They don't apply to us if we don't make moral judgments.
But there are other ways of escape.
<= back | menu | forward =>
3 is wrong. Please try again.
You can escape Hare's golden rule arguments by
{ 1 } - making only non-universalizable or non-prescriptive ought judgments.
{ 2 } - refusing to make ought judgments.
{ 3 } - accepting the reversed-situation treatment yourself.
{ 4 } - all of the above.
{ 5 } - none of the above -- there's no way to escape the argument.
This is what fanatics do. Fanatics are so strongly committed to an ideal (like racial purity) that they don't care how badly they or others are hurt in pursuit of this idea.
But there are other ways of escape.
<= back | menu | forward =>
4 is correct!
You can escape Hare's golden rule arguments by
{ 1 } - making only non-universalizable or non-prescriptive ought judgments.
{ 2 } - refusing to make ought judgments.
{ 3 } - accepting the reversed-situation treatment yourself.
{ 4 } - all of the above.
{ 5 } - none of the above -- there's no way to escape the argument.
Another way to escape is to say "I'm inconsistent -- but I don't care about consistency."
<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
5 is wrong. Please try again.
You can escape Hare's golden rule arguments by
{ 1 } - making only non-universalizable or non-prescriptive ought judgments.
{ 2 } - refusing to make ought judgments.
{ 3 } - accepting the reversed-situation treatment yourself.
{ 4 } - all of the above.
{ 5 } - none of the above -- there's no way to escape the argument.
Hare recognizes various ways to escape.
<= back | menu | forward =>
the end