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 .
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
The Classroom Heals the Wounds of Generations
“Hope,” wrote the German-American polymath Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy, “is the deity of youth.” Wholly dependent on adults, children…
Still Life, Still Sacred
Renaissance painters would use life-sized wooden dolls called manichini to study how drapery folds on the human…
Letters
I am writing not to address any particular article, but rather to register my concern about the…
