Hot answers tagged

2

As noted above, it certainly depends on the moral framework. For Aristotle's virtue ethics, the accumulation of wealth by means of trade may fall under pleonexia, an ignoble trait. But, of course, the philosophers of his day lived largely and unproblematically off "shareholdings" in land and slave labor. For Aquinas and the medieval moralists, ...


2

Depends on who you ask, since moral is quite subjective. "Socialists": It's immoral, if the stock owner does not participate in production, since then the stock owner merely "parasites" on the fruits of labor of others and gains profit "by not doing anything". "Marketists": It's moral, since the investor takes a risk ...


2

I think Kant's notion of duty isn't so much as a responsibility or necessary completion of any task that one is tasked to do. Rather, he is referring to "duty" as a moral imperative in the sense that, we all ought to do things, especially moral things, that can be willied as universal laws i.e. these things can also be done by others. So, if being ...


2

Welcome, Juho Normative ethics is concerned with what we ought or ought not to do, what moral obligations we have, whether and on what conditions we should obey the law, whether and on what conditions abortion or euthanasia is morally permissible and so forth. It can operate at the level of moral principles or rules and moral values or hold (with ethical ...


2

Let's put the goblin aside and concentrate on humans. This raises genuine ethical issues. What would an evil creature be? A being that is in some way intentionally extremely destructive of value. Behind this abstract formula I refer to a being that commits mass murders, that tortures children for amusement, that burns alive a lover who has jilted him, &c....


1

We are embodied beings. Our experience is of two kinds, internal and external. External experience is of the external senses. Internal experience is of two kinds, internal senses (proprioception) and thoughts. Material reality is that which we access through our external senses. Even if it's all an illusion, the word reality still means that experience,...


1

I think your question is more aligned with science or anthropology than philosophy. It isn't just a matter of having sex. How many places are there where a person could merely walk around naked in public without getting arrested? Our sex culture is deeply rooted in biology. Humans are among the very few a animals that both mate face to face and walk erect. (...


1

Some philosophers have practiced sex in public places. Diogenes the Cynic engaged in public sex, though only with himself. His point was to confront his fellow Athenians with the truth of their animal nature. Most of us, however, prefer a life of self-consciousness and feel some pride in the fact that we are not merely dogs, from which the word Cynic derives....


1

It’s about why morality evolved. Shame evolved to avoid being vulnerable, for instance while defecating. Disgust evolved to avoid hazards from infection. Humans hijacked these to serve cultural ends, and then have applied reasoning and develop cultural practices which moderate shame & disgust where it’s not relevant to harms, and to provide legal and ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible