10

In the proposition IX, part III of Ethics, Spinoza operates the following reversal of concepts: it is not because we judge that something is good that we desire that thing, but it is because we desire it that we judge it to be good. In Spinoza's philosophy, our judgement as well as our actions are entirely determined, based on what information and experience ...


3

Maximising wellbeing and avoiding suffering are just subjective heuristics required for evolution of replicating genes. A great deal of research shows things like having a job with autonomy is more important than higher pay, that a meaningful life connected to others is far more important than pleasure or suffering. We can relate moral progress to going ...


2

It's true and an inescapable fact that all our perceptions of things are just representations of those things, not those very things themselves. This is because we cannot perceive things directly but through our nervous system, from various sensory receptors to primary sensory areas to the final perception areas. What we perceive are thus what the nervous ...


2

In light of your pre-assumed objective/subjective philosophical view, there're possibly several schools of thought to account for what's "good" for a person or a species. There's evolutionary naturalism or physicalism which suggests what's good for the person or as a species will be preserved and prevailed naturally, what's "bad" will be ...


2

Your question answers itself. Well-being implies the presence of goodness before anything else; asking if the pursuit of well-being is good is like asking if I will feel pain if I hurt myself. But linguistics aside. however, all of this relies on a fundamental axiom or premise, and that is, that pursuing well-being and avoiding suffering are fundamentally ...


2

When you say "from A and B we can conclude (informally) C," there is a great deal of variation in whether a listener accepts it. People have background assumptions and methods of thinking - often not stated or known in words - which lead them to either conclude C or deny C to varying degrees of confidence. Does the listener accept A and B? If ...


2

Just to add a slightly different slant. The colloquial words need looking at. An "opinion" by itself does not imply an action, a claim to truth, or even an expressed opinion. Nor is it a proper object of any claims to "entitlement." It is not something that can be owned, no more than we can grant someone a positive entitlement to daydream,...


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

Be wary of what is meant by objective and subjective. Subjectivity is neccessarily involved, because it is a domain of concern about persons, with their points of view. But science begins with investigations by persons, but uses tools like repetition, consilience, etc to achieve repeatable results based on abstractions tested as representing the system or ...


1

I guess it to some extent reduces to where these entities are thought to be "located." Qualia-like sense data are generally considered to be located In ones mind, in that they are "the alleged mind-dependent objects that we are directly aware of in perception, and that have exactly the properties they appear to have." (See SEP). Whereas ...


1

Consider two options. Option 1: the objective reality exists. In this case, whatever veneer or facade or phantasm our experience and apperception might be, they should provide us with at least some way of deducing the nature of this reality. Like, you know, the ability to figure out which animals you may objectively hunt and eat, and which ones make the ...


1

I suppose the standard answer today would be that there are only opinions, or more usually "beliefs," with varying degrees of probability. The "objective truth" would only be one that has held up so far, such as Hume's example that the sun will rise tomorrow. An "opinion" is a judgment that can and is expressed, a social ...


1

We can know understand right from wrong the same way we understand anything else -- by coming up with a mental model for it. And in general, that model is as simple as "act in the best interests of others". It is just as obvious, however, that no one can be comfortable using it until they achieve a sufficiently deep understanding of themselves, ...


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