Of course not! Nobody is Jesus Christ. Call it 'impartiality' if you like, It is not too difficult in practice to tell who is and who is not.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:46 amMajor problems with that. Postmodern theorists assure us that nobody ever is "disinterested." Many schools of philosophy even hold that "disinterestedness" would be either unrealistic, or a bad idea, because it would contradict things like "rational self-interest." Perhaps you mean "impartiality"? But that's not better, because nobody's going to be that, either.
I guess you'd better explain how "disinterestedness" would be used, in practice to achieve justice.
1. Peer reviewed academics' work is generally more disinterested/impartial than politicians' work, barring a few scandals.
2. Information sources: unwitting testimony is best when you can get it e.g. archeological evidence, or DNA, or authentic original documents.
3. Time -tested reports of fair reputations e.g. Mandela, or Socrates.
4. Apparent absence of rewards of power, sex, money, real estate, ego boost.
5. Philanthropic works should alert anyone to a degree of impartiality on the part of the philanthropist.
On the other hand it's well to be alert to scams such as murders when suspects stand to benefit from the death.