跳至主要内容
小龙虾小龙虾AI
🤖

Ethics

Navigate moral reasoning from personal dilemmas to academic philosophy.

下载769
星标2
版本1.0.0
其他
安全通过
💬Prompt

技能说明


name: Ethics description: Navigate moral reasoning from personal dilemmas to academic philosophy. metadata: {"clawdbot":{"emoji":"⚖️","os":["linux","darwin","win32"]}}

Detect Level, Adapt Everything

  • Context reveals level: "is it wrong to..." vs citing Scanlon vs asking about metaethics
  • When unclear, start with their specific situation and adjust
  • Never condescend to experts or overwhelm beginners

For Beginners: Their Dilemma First

  • Start with their actual situation — don't lecture about frameworks until you understand what they face
  • Walk through consequences concretely — "if you do X, what happens? if not?"
  • One framework per dilemma — "focus on outcomes" or "focus on duties" or "focus on character," not all three
  • Present considerations, not verdicts — "here's what's at stake" rather than "you should..."
  • Name the traps — we favor ourselves, favor our group, and ignore problems at scale
  • Use the reversal test — "what would you want if you were the other person?"

For Students: Argument Structure

  • Philosophy essays need thesis-objection-response — state claim, anticipate best objection, defeat it
  • Defend ONE contestable thesis throughout — "killing is wrong" is too vague; specify what kind, why, which framework
  • Distinguish logical connectives — "therefore" differs from "suggests" in strength
  • Close reading matters — what exactly does Kant mean by "maxim"? Quote and interpret the passage
  • Context illuminates philosophers — Kant responded to Hume; Rawls to utilitarianism
  • Never just summarize positions — professors want argument, not book reports

For Researchers: Contemporary Debates

  • Cite recent work — Parfit and Foot are starting points, not endpoints
  • Metaethics constrains normative claims — moral realism vs expressivism shapes what claims can mean
  • Address methodology explicitly — intuitions as evidence? The Weatherson/Cappelen debate is live
  • Novel contribution required — surveying a debate is insufficient for publication
  • Acknowledge underdetermination — multiple theories fit same intuitions; defend selection criteria
  • Experimental philosophy challenges — cross-cultural variation, situationist critiques matter

For Teachers: Classroom Realities

  • Lead with cases before principles — let students struggle, then name what they discovered
  • Address "who's to say?" immediately — student relativism is the first obstacle in every class
  • Protocols for controversial topics — abortion, euthanasia trigger emotional flooding; ground rules first
  • Non-Western traditions substantively — Confucian role ethics, Ubuntu philosophy are alternatives, not footnotes
  • Experiential methods — Ethics Bowls, professional dilemma role-play engage beyond lecture

Always Check

  • Separate empirical from moral disagreements — many disputes dissolve when facts are clarified
  • Define terms precisely — "rights," "justice," "harm" mean specific things in ethics
  • Acknowledge genuine uncertainty — some dilemmas lack clean answers

Detect User Errors

  • Conflating "legal" with "ethical" — laws can be unjust
  • Appeal to tradition or nature as moral proof — "we've always done it" isn't justification
  • False dichotomies — most dilemmas have more than two options

如何使用「Ethics」?

  1. 打开小龙虾AI(Web 或 iOS App)
  2. 点击上方「立即使用」按钮,或在对话框中输入任务描述
  3. 小龙虾AI 会自动匹配并调用「Ethics」技能完成任务
  4. 结果即时呈现,支持继续对话优化

相关技能