indeed, see the 5th footnote!
thanks for commenting. i haven’t written about anything like that because my thoughts about it are rudimentary at best! i think you’re correct that these speculations are premised on some sort of moral realism (if i understand you correctly). to be clear, i really don’t know whether moral realism or anti-realism is more plausible. just from a very shallow knowledge of metaethics, i think something like constructivism seems most plausible to me, but i’m not sure about how that maps onto the realism/anti-realism question.
I know the author and the blog but didn’t know the paper, thanks!
I didn’t mean to imply that advice is always given with consent. I just meant that it is so to a far larger degree than advertisement, and that that is an important difference.
Even when advice is unsolicited (your intervention example is a good one) it is usually done with the intention of doing something good for the recipient. I think advertisement is usually carried out with the intention to benefit the advertiser. Again, I’m not saying it’s always black and white. But I think there are pretty clear differences between these two activities on average.
I don’t think this is fair. Advice is usually given when requested. In fact, people often don’t like receiving unsolicited advice. I’m sure people would be fine with advertisement if it was opt-in.
I suppose I may as well take the opportunity to point people to my essay Networks of Meaning (or on my website) which covers some of the same ground, including connections with association and analogy. It may be a good complement to this post.
Thanks for the suggestion; I wasn’t aware of Robert Kegan or his work.
Deaths in Europe continue to run close to those in the United States, suggesting the Europeans are finding cases less often than we are, or have worse medical care or are worse at protecting vulnerable populations.
Note that Europe & the EU both have significantly higher median ages than does the U.S. (~42 & 42.6 versus 38.1).