Blog 2

            As I read “Metaethical Issues” I really enjoyed the scene the author painted of the guitar lesson and the three dilemma’s that were brought up during his time spent going to the lesson and eating lunch. It really made me think of all the choices we do have in life that often go unrecognized. Further on in the reading I began to turn my head at a few concepts that the author brought up for example what it means to have a “good life” because for me, I think that there is no general answer to that question. However the question that I want to pose on the blog and further discuss is when the author makes the analogy of life to a game of chess. It is on page 6 and the author makes the claim, “who would be most likely to excel at chess? Someone who randomly moves their pieces with no deeper thought of why they are doing such, or someone who studies the game and strategically uses their knowledge to win.” While I do agree that there is a clear answer to that question in regards to chess, however for life I cannot say I agree with the analogy. My main reason for disagreeing is simply this: in chess there is a definitive winner and loser. In life this is not the case. One cannot, in my opinion, “win” at life like they can a chess match. People make decisions that affect everything aspect of their lives, but that is not to say that a wrong decision constitutes a “loss” in life. It is simply a learning experience and something to overcome.