What should the rules be and what should they be based on? Who and what should be considered? How do you assign a 'moral value' to something or a 'moral cost' to a decision?
In another thread I wrote:
Should ethics even have rules? Should it be like mathematics and be internally consistent? Can it be? Could you start with a premise or premices and work from there? How subjective could they be?
I certainly would like it if there were a set of Fair Ethical Rules that everyone followed. But since the whole thing is based on opinions and common sense (IOW feelings, based on instincts, shaped by evolution and the environment), people will differ in their choice of rules.
How does your morality work?
In another thread I wrote:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cheetah (Post 12776980)
Science/psychology/sociology can only describe our chosen morality and at best explain why we chose it, based on feelings, based on instincts, shaped by evolution and the environment.
It can help you compare the outcomes of different moral choices, but it will never be able to make the choice. A human will still have to make the choice based on nothing more than feelings. |
Should ethics even have rules? Should it be like mathematics and be internally consistent? Can it be? Could you start with a premise or premices and work from there? How subjective could they be?
I certainly would like it if there were a set of Fair Ethical Rules that everyone followed. But since the whole thing is based on opinions and common sense (IOW feelings, based on instincts, shaped by evolution and the environment), people will differ in their choice of rules.
How does your morality work?
via International Skeptics Forum https://ift.tt/2T3vMgO
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire