Objectivist ethics

Tommy asks the following in another thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tommy Jeppesen (Post 9883705) So how do you know that an ethical claim is a fact? What I am trying to get you explain, how do you know what an ethical fact is? In other words and this predates Aristotles as Protagoras is one of the first to have observed this - moral and ethical seem to be in part non-cognitive and otherwise emotional, subjective/non-objective and relative. So in short - how do you, Dinwar, explain that ethics can be based on objective facts, if that indeed is your claim?

I'm not Dinwar but I will give this my best shot.



Here is my understanding: Morality or ethics (yes, those terms are interchangeable in philosophy) is a guide to volitional action. It tells you what to do and what not to do. The purpose of morality in Objectivism is to remain alive and prosper (like Mr. Spock said: Live long and prosper). Quoting from Ayn Rand in 'Philosophy: Who Needs It':

Quote:

Life or death is man’s only fundamental alternative. To live is his basic act of choice. If he chooses to live, a rational ethics will tell him what principles of action are required to implement his choice. If he does not choose to live, nature will take its course.

also, from Galt's speech:

Quote:

The purpose of morality is to teach you, not to suffer and die, but to enjoy yourself and live.

An ethical claim is a fact if it achieves the goal of life and prosperity. If it does not do so, it isn't a fact. That seems to be the case in Objectivism.

via JREF Forum http://ift.tt/1lLlWvb