12

So even if a person felt (subjective) what he was doing was right, that wouldn't, by societal standards(objective), be considered right. That's not what those terms — subjective and objective — mean. Subjective does not necessarily mean related to feeling; it simply means that it varies from person to person (subiectum is Latin for the agent in a sentence). ...


9

The Golden rule goes back long before Greek philosophy, we find it in ancient traditions and religions, albeit in different formulations. Should one do good with someone who doesn't deserve it? To answer this question, we should change it to something that is more conceivable. Should one let a toddler play with scissors if he wants to play with ...


4

This is one of the oldest questions of philosophy and probably every philosopher of the past 2000 years has weighed in on that. So I'll focus on the different interpretations of it and what they mean for your answer: There is an active version, which you quoted. That version is narcissistic. It assumes that everyone else wants the same things I want. ...


4

Clarification "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." In other words, we are to do to others as we would be willing to have them do to us. This could produce a welter of divergent results, not all them tolerable, depending on what we are willing to have others do to us. On this basis it could be a thoroughly unethical command. The same ...


2

You raise an intriguing issue. I'm not sure, however, that your question is best framed in terms of 'ethical subjectivism'. This term can cover a number of views. ETHICAL SUBJECTIVISM There are four formulations of ethical subjectivism which readily come to mind. 1) A moral judgment is subjective if it cannot be made and justified independently of ...


2

Conifold and Hubery have it exactly right. Libertarianism is very roughly the view that necessarily an agent acts freely only if determinism is false, and that some agents act freely. This has nothing directly to do with morality at all. Someone who rejected the very idea of morality could still support libertarianism. Moral realism is a view about the ...


2

Your moral intuition seems to be close to that of Immanuel Kant: IF I (morally) ought to do something THEN this should have an impact on my faculty of desire (motivation). The thing you are missing is close to the criticism of Kant developed by Hegel: Principles alone do nothing. They are purely formal. Any kind of bindingness or motivational form can only ...


2

Welcome, Mark Facts as such have no motivational force and create no imperatives. President Kennedy died in 1963. Broccoli is nutritious. Chicago is closer to NY than NY is to London. None of these facts motivates me to do anything and none creates an imperative. Kennedy died in 1963 - so what ? It's a fact but I carry on typing; it's motivationally inert. ...


2

This is absolutely a philosophical question. Nick Bostrom identifies the 3 malignant failure modes for Artificial General Intelligence: perverse instantiation; infrastructure profusion; and mind crime. The first two are physical, the third is virtual, which is essentially what you are talking about. In principle, anything can be simulated by even very ...


2

At face value, assuming moral realism, there's no reason any text whatsoever couldn't contain valid moral knowledge. Just start with valid moral knowledge, and add whatever you want to it. There are many atheists who do take the Bible in this manner --as some valid moral principles surrounded by a lot of (what they consider) nonsense. However, it's clear ...


1

Where AI becomes competent enough that people can become dependent on it and vulnerable to manipulation 'ethics of care' would be pertinent. Good luck to that though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_care Carol Gilligan, who is considered the originator of the ethics of care, criticized the application of generalized standards as "morally ...


1

So the q is basically this: how can a value judgment be true or false Some simply hold that it can. meta-ethical subjectivism as defined by Sayre-McCord (1986) and Snare (1992), is different from non-cognitivism in the following sense—the non-cognitivist takes moral claims to be mere expressions of attitudes, while the subjectivist takes them to be ...


1

If the criminal is in a cell with another sentient being then he is not by himself. Whether he created it or not is immaterial. His world now constitutes a microcosm with the same moral issues as anywhere else.


1

'Leaving' and 'better life' are the two terms that make this question rather subjective. You can leave your native country for study purpose or for other good purposes and then return and lead a better life as many people do. Often this can be treated as moral. But we can't admit intellectual and moral betrayal. It is always immoral. If your question is ...


1

Review the concept of morals, and review your economy concepts, because you're subjectively implying a lot. Morals is a system of regulation like religion or law, which ultimate goal is improving the survival probabilities of the group. Economy is not a zero-sum game, that is, living in a country is normally a win-win (except when you're clearly destructive ...


1

If giving preference to a certain group of people (in this case, employees of a given company) does not come at the expense of people outside that group, it is ok. However, in this case the question is trickier, since ventilators don't operate by themselves, i.e. they need the attention of highly qualified medical personnel. Disconnecting a person to ...


1

Sartre (late in life interview with Benny Levy), Alasdair MacIntyre and György Lukacs were all concerned with developing an ethics towards the end of their career. MacIntyre is still alive, I think. I guess you could say the problem of ethics became acute because of Stalin. [and the later Kchruchev speech to disgrace the Stalin legacy]. But Sartre as far ...


1

'Cognitivism' here relates to knowledge (cf.'cognition'). If moral cognitivism holds, then there are at least some moral truths that can be and are known. Here's how the concept of moral cognitivism can be built up: Suppose one concedes that moral judgments may be true or false. Does it follow that he commits himself to moral cognitivism? No, for the ...


1

(This answer is essentially a follow-up on the answer of @BertrandWittgenstein'sGhost) First of all, we should not confuse moral systems and their properties with model-theoretical formalisations of them. I consider the question to be about the latter and I think the possibility of consistent, complete, and useful/practically applicable formalisations can ...


1

Well, as far as utilitarianism and other gradated moral systems (aka consequentialist moral systems) are concerned they are quite complex. In order to formalize them we will have to utilize a sort of many-valued logic (more on that later). As for deontological systems, then they are boolean and, therefore, any simple two-valued system of modal logic will ...


1

'Morality' as the word is ordinarily used in moral discourse cannot be defined as 'maximise happiness to the maximum number of people'. If I said, 'She has no morality', I am not saying the (unintelligible) 'She has no maximise happiness to the maximum number of people'. This isn't even grammatical English. What I think you are suggesting is that we should ...


1

The Golden Rule is simply reciprocal altruism. Which is an evolutionary trait which enabled us to move from small hunter/gatherer groups to larger groups (and thence tribes and villages etc). Because that in turn gave benefits in the sharing of food and labour and hence increased the chances of survival of any given member of that group. Can you cheat and ...


1

Kant thought that the answer is yes, see ought implies can (OIC):"The action to which the "ought" applies must indeed be possible under natural conditions" [A548/B576]. Moore, and many others, accepted Kant's dictum, for we “cannot say of anyone that he ought to do a certain thing, if it is a thing which it is physically impossible for him to do” (1922: 317)....


1

I'm not a philosopher, but yes: moral realism and ethical subjectivism overlap under the right theistic conditions. Let's say that the ethical subjectivist is on Facebook. Suppose that Mark Zuckerberg employs a proprietary fake-news-prevention algorithm in order to remove problem users from the network. Each user's actions are judged according to the same ...


1

Libertarianism is a position that there are agents who can exercise free will because reality is not deterministic and agents conscious enough to exercise free will exist. Moral realism provides a justification for praising or blaming a free agent for making a choice. As the quote from Nietzsche mentioned one needs an agent to be free in order to blame or ...


1

I agree that it was ethical based on the lesser of 2 evils principle, and without the need to invoke the "saving of American lives" part. Assume the nuclear option claimed ~700,000 souls, and destroyed the great culture of 2 cities. In Hiroshima, "300,000: Total death toll to date, including those who have died from radiation-related cancers." The non-...


1

Definitely malleable You say... According to what I perceive, the moral compass is static, defined by religion. This is trivially provable as false, by counter-example. From Christianity and Judaism, you have plenty of moral laws in for instance Leviticus that are clearly not compatible with modern justice. Stoning for adultery A ban on tattoos ...


1

Ironically, with your question, you kind of just defined subjective morality. Relativism, roughly put, is the view that truth and falsity, right and wrong, standards of reasoning, and procedures of justification are products of differing conventions and frameworks of assessment and that their authority is confined to the context giving rise to them. -...


1

What is true to one is false to another (Shobogenzo by Dogen). Given that moralit(ies) among various cultures and civilizations were and are different, they are subject to the in-groups concerned and no one else. Regulating morality is a completely different issue, and is a sign of arrogance - in fact most good laws are found by observing excesses and ...


1

This is a false dichotomy; into which category would you place moral fictionalism? To me, it seems to require an independent one. moral objectivism: the truth or falsity of (some) moral judgments are not context-dependent. moral relativism: the truth or falsity of (some) moral judgments are context-dependent. moral fictionalism: moral judgments are either ...


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