That may well be so, because I don’t understand what does the adjective “moral” have to do with the tragedy of the commons, too.
It has to do with reasoning about good and bad outcomes, incentives, choices of action … in what way is that not moral reasoning?
If you stick your hand into the fire you’ll get burned. If you don’t, you won’t. See: “reasoning about good and bad outcomes, incentives, choices of action”. Is that moral reasoning?
Quite a lot of both traditional and philosophical moral views attribute negative value to self-destructive behavior, actually.
I don’t see anything self-destructive about sticking your hand into a fire. I’ve done it and I’m still around :-P
On a bit more serious note, you’re confusing moral reasoning itself with the subject of moral reasoning.
That may well be so, because I don’t understand what does the adjective “moral” have to do with the tragedy of the commons, too.
It has to do with reasoning about good and bad outcomes, incentives, choices of action … in what way is that not moral reasoning?
If you stick your hand into the fire you’ll get burned. If you don’t, you won’t. See: “reasoning about good and bad outcomes, incentives, choices of action”. Is that moral reasoning?
Quite a lot of both traditional and philosophical moral views attribute negative value to self-destructive behavior, actually.
I don’t see anything self-destructive about sticking your hand into a fire. I’ve done it and I’m still around :-P
On a bit more serious note, you’re confusing moral reasoning itself with the subject of moral reasoning.