one: who decided that cost and worth was the best way to make choices? and by that we mean with respect to self-interest. as opposed to morality, or greater good, or some other ideal (oscaraustin suggests responsibility). no one advocates making an ethical pros and cons list, ever.
two: some have argued that choice disempowers, not simply because of the paradox of having many options, or the flux of changing circumstances, but that the existence of various valid options diminishes the soundness of each individual one. compellingly and truly, the grass is always validly greener. how does one handle asking whether one can ever afford to forego the roads not taken?
No comments:
Post a Comment