Sometimes, when facing dilemmas that oppose means and ends, rather than confronting their complexity, we resort to the strategic invocation of a principle to resolve the tension
Why call this mental maneuver the moralization gambit? You illustrate it with a moral example, but the morality is in the example and not the maneuver. We perform the same maneuver when, after being promoted at work, we look back fondly at our long overtime hours. Had we not been promoted, we would instead mourn for all the leisure we could have had instead.
The moral element is central: it’s not just about framing something differently, it’s about attributing a moral essence to an act, making it imperative (or proscribed), and thus beyond cost-benefit challenge (of the outcome of the act).
We would not typically see a promotion at work as a moral affair, certainly not where there’s a means/ends dilemma.
Wow, invasion and interventions in sovereign countries are now a “minor contravention of arcane and abstract rules”. Are you frkn kidding me?
Also, not that it changes your argument’s logic much, but it’s bold to assume that Americans’ “primary concern is the economic welfare of the Venezuelans”. Americans are concerned with being the good guys while still being wealthier and more powerful. That’s the real dilemma here.
Why call this mental maneuver the moralization gambit? You illustrate it with a moral example, but the morality is in the example and not the maneuver. We perform the same maneuver when, after being promoted at work, we look back fondly at our long overtime hours. Had we not been promoted, we would instead mourn for all the leisure we could have had instead.
The moral element is central: it’s not just about framing something differently, it’s about attributing a moral essence to an act, making it imperative (or proscribed), and thus beyond cost-benefit challenge (of the outcome of the act).
We would not typically see a promotion at work as a moral affair, certainly not where there’s a means/ends dilemma.
Wow, invasion and interventions in sovereign countries are now a “minor contravention of arcane and abstract rules”. Are you frkn kidding me?
Also, not that it changes your argument’s logic much, but it’s bold to assume that Americans’ “primary concern is the economic welfare of the Venezuelans”. Americans are concerned with being the good guys while still being wealthier and more powerful. That’s the real dilemma here.
I am making neither the claim nor the assumption you suggest I make.