tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-223797477664258632.post8932998999542062735..comments2023-09-11T01:18:18.763-07:00Comments on Natural Right and Biology: On the Beautiful and the Good 2Ken Blanchardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09580209017016829598noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-223797477664258632.post-14323036044354018472016-09-09T20:14:23.762-07:002016-09-09T20:14:23.762-07:00Thanks, Dr. Blanchard. This explanation makes sens...Thanks, Dr. Blanchard. This explanation makes sense.Miranda Flintnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-223797477664258632.post-43459892675759538582016-09-09T19:47:17.420-07:002016-09-09T19:47:17.420-07:00These are very complex questions, but I will try t...These are very complex questions, but I will try to give a brief answer. The good is always "most beneficial choice for the person who is doing the choosing," if, as I argue, the good is the choice worthy. That doesn't mean that it is always the selfish choice. There may be (and I believe that there are) things that one ought to care about more than oneself. One may care about one's family, one's political community, or even about one's environment. <br /><br />Likewise, the "person" making the choice may be an individual or a community, as when we choose a president or decide to legalize divorce, or abortion, or marijuana. <br /><br />Because I wear different hats-individual, father, citizen-deciding what the good is can be very complicated. I should be prepared to make sacrifices for my children and my country; but how much and in which cases? Prudence is the virtue of choosing well in each circumstance, which is why Aristotle and Plato praised it so highly. <br /><br />Is there a universal good? Sure: the good life for oneself and one's family and the city (of man to be sure, and perhaps also the City of God). Ken Blanchardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09580209017016829598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-223797477664258632.post-88162166021707143242016-09-07T18:15:01.413-07:002016-09-07T18:15:01.413-07:00I did not mean to imply that divorce was always ba...I did not mean to imply that divorce was always bad. Gingrich's choice appears to many people as immoral because he abandoned his wife when she most needed him. You are right in noting that Gingrich's affair ruined his political reputation. But what if it hadn't? What if his choice made everything better for him, while making everything worse for his wife? Would it be considered choice-worthy? Let's say - over time - Gingrich remains happy and his wife remains miserable. <br /><br />To be good does something have to be universally worth choosing or does it only have to be the most beneficial choice for the person who is doing the choosing? Mirandahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09734054212740296271noreply@blogger.com