A decision procedure must be implementable with limited information; a criterion of rightness can reference facts unavailable at decision-time. Conflating them obscures this asymmetry.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Conflating: Conflating means mixing together or treating two different things as if they were the same thing, when they're actually distinct. It's a logical error where someone blurs important differences between concepts, ideas, or situations to make an argument seem stronger than it is. For example, conflating "being critical of a policy" with "being disloyal to your country" wrongly equates two separate things.
Implementable(in ethics and philosophy): Able to be put into practice or actually used in real situations.
asymmetry(Modal logic frame semantics): A frame property expressible in hybrid logic by the formula c→□¬◇c, meaning if world x accesses world y, then y does not access x.
criterion of rightness(Consequentialist theory — distinguished from a decision procedure): A standard used to evaluate whether an action or decision procedure is right, which can operate at a higher level than direct moment-to-moment decision-making

Based on where you are in your exploration