Miles, everyone, moral realism

Discuss arguments for existence of God and faith in general. Any aspect of any orientation toward religion/spirituality, as long as it is based upon a positive open to other people attitude.

Moderator: Metacrock

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts: 10046
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Miles, everyone, moral realism

Post by Metacrock » Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:30 am

Since the idiot on CARM who I call "nomcramblunent moron" (I never could remember his real screen name) the who who assailed me with moral realism, I've been wondering about it.

First is his assertion really true that moral realism is the ruling climate of pinon now? Is it is so far and away accepted as to just sweep aside all other past ideas?

Does it actually eliminate deontolgy and teleology? (actually it is considered a form of deontology).


Is it so obvious? It reminds me of presuppositional apologetics in that they just act like "O this is obvious, if you don't get it you are just an idiot." Are they all that way or was that just the little group of atheists on carm?
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

User avatar
mdsimpson92
Posts: 2187
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:05 pm
Location: Tianjin, China

Re: Miles, everyone, moral realism

Post by mdsimpson92 » Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:13 am

Metacrock wrote:Since the idiot on CARM who I call "nomcramblunent moron" (I never could remember his real screen name) the who who assailed me with moral realism, I've been wondering about it.

First is his assertion really true that moral realism is the ruling climate of pinon now? Is it is so far and away accepted as to just sweep aside all other past ideas?

Does it actually eliminate deontolgy and teleology? (actually it is considered a form of deontology).


Is it so obvious? It reminds me of presuppositional apologetics in that they just act like "O this is obvious, if you don't get it you are just an idiot." Are they all that way or was that just the little group of atheists on carm?
Yes, moral realism is generally the norm for the majority of philosophers. That being said, I think that you count as a type of moral realist anyways and that you guys are talking past each other. In general Util, Virtue, and Deontology are considered types of moral realism. At least in my intro class. Hell, my teacher seemed to lean virtue ethics was a moral realist.


Here's an article just for the hell of it.

http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~finlay/Moral%20Realism.pdf
Julia: It's all... a dream...
Spike Spiegel: Yeah... just a dream...

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts: 10046
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Re: Miles, everyone, moral realism

Post by Metacrock » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:15 am

mdsimpson92 wrote:
Metacrock wrote:Since the idiot on CARM who I call "nomcramblunent moron" (I never could remember his real screen name) the who who assailed me with moral realism, I've been wondering about it.

First is his assertion really true that moral realism is the ruling climate of pinon now? Is it is so far and away accepted as to just sweep aside all other past ideas?

Does it actually eliminate deontolgy and teleology? (actually it is considered a form of deontology).


Is it so obvious? It reminds me of presuppositional apologetics in that they just act like "O this is obvious, if you don't get it you are just an idiot." Are they all that way or was that just the little group of atheists on carm?
Yes, moral realism is generally the norm for the majority of philosophers. That being said, I think that you count as a type of moral realist anyways and that you guys are talking past each other. In general Util, Virtue, and Deontology are considered types of moral realism. At least in my intro class. Hell, my teacher seemed to lean virtue ethics was a moral realist.


Here's an article just for the hell of it.

http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~finlay/Moral%20Realism.pdf

here is my major issue with him. I said that value underlay all ethical systems, that's why axioms have to be grounded. he says no that's crap it's just obvious what's truly good and besides that we can use scinece to tell us. I think that's horrible stupid. is he just missing the boat on what they say? Or is that the new line?
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts: 10046
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Re: Miles, everyone, moral realism

Post by Metacrock » Mon Mar 18, 2013 1:07 pm

I can tell you just the introduction to that link that the guy on carm did not understand the full range of issues involved in moral realism. It's not the neat little scientism pep rally he tried to make it into.
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

User avatar
mdsimpson92
Posts: 2187
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:05 pm
Location: Tianjin, China

Re: Miles, everyone, moral realism

Post by mdsimpson92 » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:57 pm

Metacrock wrote:I can tell you just the introduction to that link that the guy on carm did not understand the full range of issues involved in moral realism. It's not the neat little scientism pep rally he tried to make it into.
Agreed, the only way that I can see that science can help ethics is to show what we "can" do, because even Kant thought that "ought" implied "can". However, beyond that, there really isn't much science can do.
Julia: It's all... a dream...
Spike Spiegel: Yeah... just a dream...

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts: 10046
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Re: Miles, everyone, moral realism

Post by Metacrock » Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:49 am

mdsimpson92 wrote:
Metacrock wrote:I can tell you just the introduction to that link that the guy on carm did not understand the full range of issues involved in moral realism. It's not the neat little scientism pep rally he tried to make it into.
Agreed, the only way that I can see that science can help ethics is to show what we "can" do, because even Kant thought that "ought" implied "can". However, beyond that, there really isn't much science can do.
I think the thing about values is paramount. Ethics is value systems and you can't just assert the values merely because we can do some scientific studies on behavior. That's the major issue with the nomcrambulant guy. He though that moral realism says moral axioms do not stem from values they stem from facts.
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

User avatar
mdsimpson92
Posts: 2187
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:05 pm
Location: Tianjin, China

Re: Miles, everyone, moral realism

Post by mdsimpson92 » Mon Mar 25, 2013 1:03 am

Metacrock wrote:
I think the thing about values is paramount. Ethics is value systems and you can't just assert the values merely because we can do some scientific studies on behavior. That's the major issue with the nomcrambulant guy. He though that moral realism says moral axioms do not stem from values they stem from facts.
Behaviors do matter in the sense that we should take into account how they influence us as well as needs/wants etc. But they do not serve as the basis of morality. That is created by relationships between individuals. If that did not exists, then the whole rational egotism would be the only thing left.
Julia: It's all... a dream...
Spike Spiegel: Yeah... just a dream...

User avatar
mdsimpson92
Posts: 2187
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:05 pm
Location: Tianjin, China

Re: Miles, everyone, moral realism

Post by mdsimpson92 » Mon Mar 25, 2013 1:03 am

Metacrock wrote:
I think the thing about values is paramount. Ethics is value systems and you can't just assert the values merely because we can do some scientific studies on behavior. That's the major issue with the nomcrambulant guy. He though that moral realism says moral axioms do not stem from values they stem from facts.
Behaviors do matter in the sense that we should take into account how they influence us as well as needs/wants etc. But they do not serve as the basis of morality. That is created by relationships between individuals. If that did not exist, then the whole rational egotism would be the only thing left.
Julia: It's all... a dream...
Spike Spiegel: Yeah... just a dream...

User avatar
mdsimpson92
Posts: 2187
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:05 pm
Location: Tianjin, China

Re: Miles, everyone, moral realism

Post by mdsimpson92 » Mon Mar 25, 2013 1:03 am

Metacrock wrote:
I think the thing about values is paramount. Ethics is value systems and you can't just assert the values merely because we can do some scientific studies on behavior. That's the major issue with the nomcrambulant guy. He though that moral realism says moral axioms do not stem from values they stem from facts.
Behaviors do matter in the sense that we should take into account how they influence us as well as needs/wants etc. But they do not serve as the basis of morality. That is created by relationships between individuals. If that did not exist, then the whole rational egotism would be the only thing left.
Julia: It's all... a dream...
Spike Spiegel: Yeah... just a dream...

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts: 10046
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Re: Miles, everyone, moral realism

Post by Metacrock » Mon Mar 25, 2013 11:50 am

mdsimpson92 wrote:
Metacrock wrote:
I think the thing about values is paramount. Ethics is value systems and you can't just assert the values merely because we can do some scientific studies on behavior. That's the major issue with the nomcrambulant guy. He though that moral realism says moral axioms do not stem from values they stem from facts.
Behaviors do matter in the sense that we should take into account how they influence us as well as needs/wants etc. But they do not serve as the basis of morality. That is created by relationships between individuals. If that did not exist, then the whole rational egotism would be the only thing left.

what about value systems? don't they still have to be central to ethical theory?
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

Post Reply