maximizing the quality of life — Yun Jae Jung
some definitions of Moral Good and Moral Bad — Yun Jae Jung
Morality is the distinction between Good and Bad:
Good is anything that raises an individual's quality of life;
Bad is anything that lowers an individual's quality of life. — Yun Jae Jung
Well the merits of my system is that you can actually get feedback on what is good or bad. — Yun Jae Jung
Good is anything that raises an individual's quality of life;
Bad is anything that lowers an individual's quality of life. — Yun Jae Jung
Then why the tomes of theories and discussions about the good and the bad?The upshot is that the good is not definable, and hence that your enterprise is bound to fail. — Banno
Thoughts? Objections?Ethical Good is 'the optimization of Moral Agency' (i.e. virtue) by right judgments conduct & relationships.
Ethical Bad is 'the suboptimization of Moral Agency' (i.e. vice) by wrong judgments conduct & relationships.
Moral Right indicates judgments, conduct or relationships for preventing or reducing harm and/or injustice (i.e. misery)
Moral Wrong indicates judgments, conduct or relationships that (deliberately or negligently) fail to prevent or reduce harm and/or injustice (i.e. misery).
(NB: And evil indicates judgments, conduct or relationships that deliberately or negligently destroy, or likewise fail to prevent destroying, either moral or non-moral agency.)
Stop right there - good is not anything which raises an individual' s quality of life. — J O Lambert
Good is anything that raises an individual's quality of life;
Bad is anything that lowers an individual's quality of life. — Yun Jae Jung
quality of life — Yun Jae Jung
According to a quick search online, Good can be both an adjective and a noun. The first definition for it being a noun is "that which is morally right; righteousness." — Yun Jae Jung
It's both, like a physician's diagnosis of a patient's health which then implies a prescribed treatment and what the patient should do to complement – sustain the effectiveness of – treatment.Wouldn't that be a descriptive definition of morality as opposed to a normative one? — Yun Jae Jung
As for "virtue" and "vice", from my studies of, say, Confucius and Aristotle, these broad concepts, or categories, denote habits of character (i.e. agency) which positively feedback (strengthen via virtuous (win-win) cycles) and negatively feedback (weaken via vicious (win-lose —> lose-lose) cycles), respectively.What differentiates a person's virtue from a vice though?
If the solution to the problems of good and bad is as simple as you outlined earlier:So... for you philosophy is only about setting out definitions? — Banno
then one has to wonder what all those moral philosophers have been doing for millennia.The upshot is that the good is not definable, and hence that your enterprise is bound to fail. — Banno
This criticism is an example of Moore's open question argument, which is generally taken to show that for any proposed definition of moral good and moral bad, it is possible to ask if that definition is itself good or bad. — Banno
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.