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

Moral Certitude and the Iran War

Steven A. Long

The current military engagement with Iran calls renewed attention to just war theory in the Catholic tradition.…

The Slow Death of England: New and Notable Books

Mark Bauerlein

The fate of England is much in the news as popular resistance to mass immigration grows, limits…

Ethics of Rhetoric in Times of War

R. R. Reno

What we say matters. And the way we say it matters. This is especially true in times…