You say
> but these Scenarios are deceptive ..........."
Is it impossible for some of these experiments to actually capture the subtle aspects you refer to (context and individual)?
While I cannot point you to a classification of types of thought experiments, there are of course several kinds which may involve group decisions or individual decisions.
There is no reason why individual responses are not to be considered.
With respect to context, as an example a thought experiment that entails having to imagine something familiar isnt fat fetched and can be said to be within a realistic context.
What you have not done with your question is specify why you presume that context and individual responses are not considered or left out of thought experiments,
Then state that on this basis, these scenarios (i.e thought experiments) are deceptive.
Jazzmatazz7 t1_j9kqklk wrote
Reply to Thought experiments claim to use our intuitive responses to generate philosophical insights. But these scenarios are deceptive. Moral intuitions depend heavily on context and the individual. by IAI_Admin
You say > but these Scenarios are deceptive ..........."
Is it impossible for some of these experiments to actually capture the subtle aspects you refer to (context and individual)?
While I cannot point you to a classification of types of thought experiments, there are of course several kinds which may involve group decisions or individual decisions.
There is no reason why individual responses are not to be considered.
With respect to context, as an example a thought experiment that entails having to imagine something familiar isnt fat fetched and can be said to be within a realistic context.
What you have not done with your question is specify why you presume that context and individual responses are not considered or left out of thought experiments,
Then state that on this basis, these scenarios (i.e thought experiments) are deceptive.