Discussion: Should We Have a 3/32 Scale for Morality?

A Forum for the Most Esteemed Members of Society

Introduction

As we all know, the traditional 5/32 scale for morality has been a cornerstone of our societal values for centuries. But is it time to rethink this ancient system? Our esteemed panel of experts weighs in on the pros and cons of a new, more nuanced 3/32 scale.

Arguments in Favor

Aaron T. Jansen, Renowned Ethicist

The 3/32 scale offers a more precise and granular approach to moral decision-making. By allowing for a wider range of values, we can better account for the complexities of human nature.

Read the full argument

Counterarguments

Dr. Emily P. Bottomsworth, Moral Philosopher

The 3/32 scale is too vague, too open-ended. It's a moral free-for-all, where anyone can claim to be 3/32 and do as they please.

Read the full counterargument

Read another counterargument