VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Thursday, November 14, 12:31:34amLogin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 12345678[9]10 ]
Subject: My response.


Author:
Wade A. Tisthammer
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 12/15/02 12:10am
In reply to: Wade A. Tisthammer 's message, "What is your take on morality?" on 12/14/02 11:39pm

I think I’ll answer my own question. I adhere to ethical objectivism. Noncognitivist and relativist theories just seem too ridiculous to me given the right scenarios. For instance, noncognitivism says that there’s nothing morally wrong with viciously killing infants. Ethical subjectivism says it’s morally right for one to viciously kill infants if that’s what one’s opinion is. Cultural relativism says it’s morally right for people in the culture to viciously kill infants if that’s what the culture’s opinion is.

Certain ethical objectivist theories also seem too ridiculous given the right scenarios. Utilitarianism says it’s morally right to kill an infant if it increases the overall pleasure and happiness of people. Ethical egoism says its okay to steal candy from babies if it is in your best interest (hey, candy tastes good, and if you can get away with it...), and thus does not seem to be a coherent universal (objectivist) moral theory (since someone’s self-interest might conflict with someone else’s).

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
Subject Author Date
My answerDamoclese12/15/02 3:49pm
    My question.Wade A. Tisthammer12/15/02 11:11pm
    damoclese moralshuggy12/16/02 6:53pm


    Post a message:
    This forum requires an account to post.
    [ Create Account ]
    [ Login ]

    Forum timezone: GMT-6
    VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
    Before posting please read our privacy policy.
    VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
    Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.