Sidgwick doesn’t define moral behavior as what an individual has the most reason to do. He does say that all agents have a reason to take a moral action, but doesn’t define moral action to mean that. He then goes on to say that what is moral
“cannot, without error, be disapproved by any other mind”
Which means that he is using a different definition of ‘rational’ in the phrase ‘rational morality’ than I am.
If you think it is immoral for Annie to eat so much salt, that is different from saying that she would be happier/healthier/closer to reaching her optimization goals/should eat less salt.
I could use your given definition to interpret what you said, and vice versa. It doesn’t matter to me what definition you use, but it is critical to me that I know what definition you use.
Right, I didn’t provide a link for Sidgwick.
Sidgwick doesn’t define moral behavior as what an individual has the most reason to do. He does say that all agents have a reason to take a moral action, but doesn’t define moral action to mean that. He then goes on to say that what is moral
Which means that he is using a different definition of ‘rational’ in the phrase ‘rational morality’ than I am.
If you think it is immoral for Annie to eat so much salt, that is different from saying that she would be happier/healthier/closer to reaching her optimization goals/should eat less salt.
I don’t think this line of argument can progress further without one or both of us giving citations, and I’m not sure what good that would accomplish.
I could use your given definition to interpret what you said, and vice versa. It doesn’t matter to me what definition you use, but it is critical to me that I know what definition you use.