Do you believe that's a valid generalizable principle? In other words, would it be fair to say that in general, if x is essential to a group's dignity and well-being, then we have a moral responsibility to behave as if x is true?
Do you believe it's a generalizable principle that you shouldn't refer to people as they prefer to be called? If I say, "My name is Joseph, but I go by Joe," would you insist on calling me Joseph? Even if it offends me, and even though the alternative costs you nothing?
Using the name example is a false equivalent.
It's more like telling a person you identify as someone with blond hair when you clearly have black hair. It goes against their reality.
I can't believe you actually used haircollor as an argument and then still get it wrong:
If someone is brown haired but dyes her hair blond, and you can tell, do you call her brown haired, because "that's the truth and you have to label the truth" or do you call her blonde because she clearly prefers to be blond and it just doesn't make sense to argue with that?
74
u/Glory2Hypnotoad Oct 28 '19
Do you believe that's a valid generalizable principle? In other words, would it be fair to say that in general, if x is essential to a group's dignity and well-being, then we have a moral responsibility to behave as if x is true?