I don’t think you can substitute “should you” with “do you” without hugely altering the problem. (though it’s true that “should you” can still include a load of instrumental selfishness)
They’re both interesting questions, but different ones. [EDIT if the Harvard justice class is also treating these as equivalent (are they?), then that sucks]
Another point on context: you can’t assume readers interpret “should” as meaning the same thing when you provide different contextual information. E.g. “Should you (as a Russian general) x” may get a different answer from “Should you (as a person) x”, even if that person is a Russian general, since the first will often be interpreted in terms of [duties of a Russian general] because the reader thinks that’s what the question is asking about (perhaps subconsciously).
The more context you throw in, the more careful you have to be that you’re still asking essentially the same question.
I don’t think you can substitute “should you” with “do you” without hugely altering the problem.
(though it’s true that “should you” can still include a load of instrumental selfishness)
They’re both interesting questions, but different ones.
[EDIT if the Harvard justice class is also treating these as equivalent (are they?), then that sucks]
Another point on context: you can’t assume readers interpret “should” as meaning the same thing when you provide different contextual information. E.g. “Should you (as a Russian general) x” may get a different answer from “Should you (as a person) x”, even if that person is a Russian general, since the first will often be interpreted in terms of [duties of a Russian general] because the reader thinks that’s what the question is asking about (perhaps subconsciously).
The more context you throw in, the more careful you have to be that you’re still asking essentially the same question.