> > So it is not rational to take advantage of the
> > irrationality of others?
>
> Egoism would say yes. However, that is another
> way of saying that egoism concedes that it is
> not rational for everyone to accept egoism,
> which would mean that egoism is wrong by the
> generalization principle. To accept egoism at
> that point would be irrational. Same goes for
> relying on the irrationality of others.
If your ethical system is based of rationality, do
you extend "utility" to include those who are
irrational or only other rational persons? Would
it be logical for utilitarianism to include only
utilitarians?
> > What if the right theory is not the most
> > rational choice?
>
> If you believe that, then the argument is
> over. There's nothing I can do or say which
> could prove that rationality is right, because
> I must necessarily do so within the boundaries
> of rationality. Meanwhile, I personally am not
> very likely to be persuaded to accept an
> irrational ethical theory, particularly since I
> *have* a rational ethical theory which seems to
> work.
Sorry, I think I may have said that wrong. I do
not mean that rationality is not right, but that
the "right" theory may not be the most rational
choice. So that the "wrong" theory may be a
rational choice.
BM