In The Hands Of The Pirots

The pirots, who karulize elatically, should be able to compile, on occasion, a manual. The Immanuel. This is a very general handbook for the living of life. The conversational immanuel is a supplement. Each maxim in those manuals should share some formal features -- these are three, and meant to shed light on Hare.


1. CONCEPTUAL generality: "moral good" will be defined in terms not too far
away from your critters's ordinary daily experiences. I.e. no
"eschatological" terms, please. The dicta will be formulted in terms of
simple psychological terms, together with the concepts involved in the very
general description of living-conditions which have been used to set up
your psychological theory

2. FORMAL generality: No _special_ addressees, please. No kings and queens,
no slaves and masters. (Aristotle was dead wrong, and _he_ was no slave, so
trust his Morals to be irremediably _biased_). _Morally_ we are _one of a
kind_, gottcha?! Kings and queens, lords and ladies, commoners and gentry.
In other terms, you'll have to ensure that there'll be no way in your moral
dicta of singling out a special subclass of addresses. The injunctions will
_have_ to be addressed, indifferently to _any very intelligent rational
critter_ (echoes of "though shalt commit no adultery", etc).

3. APPLICATIONAL generality: since the manual as conceived by you,
benevolent God, as able to be composed by _each_ of the so far
indistinguishable critters to which the manual apply, no critter will
include in it any injunction prescribing a _certain line of conduct_ in
circumstances to which he or she will _not_ likely to be subject. The
circumstances for which conduct is prescribed could be presumbed to such as
to be satisfied by _any addresee_.

Etc. Source, Grice 2001. Method in philosophical psychology, originally 1975.