Grins I’m personally a little bit pleased with the negative karma value, to be perfectly honest. I was being deliberately contrarian.
The title could probably use some work, though, yes. Originally I titled it simply “Metaethics,” but found that this was a bit heavy-handed (and I yanked out the bits actually concerned with metaethics anyways). “The Ethics of Ethics” was another I considered. Any recommendations?
No. I’m challenging people to question beliefs which are, in this context, sacred. If the response was generally positive, it would mean that I either miscalculated my audience or failed. I believe what I wrote here, which is why I wrote it. I just wouldn’t have written it for an audience which already believes it.
(Negative doesn’t necessarily mean I’ve succeeded, however—as you point out, the response could be to other things, such as the title.)
Grins I’m personally a little bit pleased with the negative karma value, to be perfectly honest. I was being deliberately contrarian.
The title could probably use some work, though, yes. Originally I titled it simply “Metaethics,” but found that this was a bit heavy-handed (and I yanked out the bits actually concerned with metaethics anyways). “The Ethics of Ethics” was another I considered. Any recommendations?
So you’re just trolling?
No. I’m challenging people to question beliefs which are, in this context, sacred. If the response was generally positive, it would mean that I either miscalculated my audience or failed. I believe what I wrote here, which is why I wrote it. I just wouldn’t have written it for an audience which already believes it.
(Negative doesn’t necessarily mean I’ve succeeded, however—as you point out, the response could be to other things, such as the title.)
I think you misunderstand the karma system. Things that challenge our beliefs are upvoted all the time.
I’d challenge that belief. Let the karma count on this comment be my evidence in my favor, or in yours!
Mere saying “challenge” doesn’t constitute a challenge.