Now this can seem a little scary for a species obsessed with order, and for this reason most folk hold fast to normative ideas, going so far as to try to convince others of the rightness of their own perspectives. To recap briefly, it is important to remember that ‘should questions’ have no ultimate answer (outside organised religion that is) in making decisions, all we have are our own subjective scales of cost and gain, right and wrong. This brings us to the thrust of this week’s piece.
Previously, we looked at the question ‘where should we travel?’, which, I argued, is best answered with another question: ‘how should we travel?’. ‘should I take a towel?’) and big ‘should questions’ (e.g. In the context of travel, we find a similar spectrum there are little ‘should questions’ (e.g. ‘should I put the kettle on?’) to the profound (e.g. ‘Should questions’ come in many shapes and sizes, from the trivial (e.g. In last week’s piece, we began looking at the normative ethics of travel, or what I otherwise called ‘should questions’.
He goes on to suggest how we might engage in immersive travel experiences and why they can benefit both the traveller and their host.
YOU SHOULD BE HERE TRAVEL GROUP SERIES
In the second of a series of articles looking at the ethics of travel, David Jobanputra argues that we need not worry about rights and wrongs so long as we are properly ‘immersed’.
0 kommentar(er)
