Moral Philosophy and the Case Against Twitter

In an amusing post that pokes fun at both Twitter and applied moral philosophy, James Anderson offers eighteen arguments ” Against All Tweets .” As an Aristotelian-Augustianian-Plantingan advocate of natural law, I was persuaded by a number of his conditional proofs. But being first-and-foremost a virtue ethicist, this was the one that convinced me:

Virtue Ethics Argument

(1) One ought always to act in good faith.
(2) Therefore, if one Twitters, one ought always to Twitter in good faith.
(3) One can Twitter in good faith only if one believes one’s life to be so important as to merit the attention of others.
(4) It is narcissistic to believe one’s life to be so important as to merit the attention of others.
(5) Therefore, one can Twitter in good faith only if one is narcissistic.
(6) Narcissism is not a virtue.
(7) Therefore, one can Twitter only if one is unvirtuous.
(8) Therefore, one ought not to Twitter.

Of course as an evangelical I also found this one compelling.

Pop Christianity Argument

(1) Would Jesus Twitter? Probably not.
(2) Therefore, Twittering is wrong.

Read the rest. And then follow First Things on Twitter .

Next
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

Restoring Man at Notre Dame

Carl R. Trueman

It is fascinating to be an outsider on the inside of an institution going through times of…

Deliver Us from Evil

Kari Jenson Gold

In a recent New York Times article entitled “Freedom With a Side of Guilt: How Food Delivery…

Natural Law Needs Revelation

Peter J. Leithart

Natural law theory teaches that God embedded a teleological moral order in the world, such that things…