Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis:
Interesting. I'd have to agree about the explaining logic part. Would this change any if there was very little difference between two acts (i.e., both seem just as logical to the lesser person)?
Well, if the superior individual perceives some small difference between the two acts, he can explain his perception of that difference to the other person in a logical manner.
It follows that within a group of people all with a genuine desire to be moral, if one person perceives the correct (optimally moral) course of action through heights of logical analysis that escape his fellows, he can then transfer this knowledge to the group through simply explaining his reasoning. The only problem would arise if some members of the group didn't have a true desire to be moral and/or were deluding themselves in some way.