How so? Morality is only human. — bloodninja
God is dead. — bloodninja
Sentience is absolutely irrelevant as far as the grounding of morality is concerned. — bloodninja
I think you are also misusing the concept "property". How can morals be a property? — bloodninja
1). If there is no human nature, then in what are our moral theories grounded?
2).If there is no human nature to ground ethical theory, then what other ethical position is left but cultural relativism? — bloodninja
There is evidence that babies are making judgments about what's right and wrong and human agency from an age of 3 or 4 months. — T Clark
I'd like to see that. — creativesoul
To predicate the concept of a human nature upon animal universalities is ridiculous - the question is better put upon by asking: what distinquishes humans from all other animals? I think that we can come to a somewhat sensible conclusion by seperating humans and animals as one entity. — Vann
I think ethics does presuppose a human nature, and also a nature-of-the-world. It presupposes that things and people have innate tendencies, innate patterns of behaviour — gurugeorge
If the biology changes, that's like the position of the stake (to which the tether is tied) changing — gurugeorge
given our biology and the given nature of the world in general. — gurugeorge
If there is no human nature, then in what are our moral theories grounded? — bloodninja
You would still have trouble getting from what is the case about human nature to what we ought do. — Banno
"Grounded in" isn't at all the same thing as "determined by." — gurugeorge
Human Nature is NOT biological. — bloodninja
Why is owning a slave immoral within our culture but perfectly moral in prior cultures? — bloodninja
So, do you think it moral?
What does your answer tell us about you? — Banno
It remains an is, from which explanation is needed if you are to derive an ought. — Banno
You would still have trouble getting from what is the case about human nature to what we ought do.
Perhaps the right thing to do is to fight our nature.
The naturalistic fallacy. — Banno
Humans are a different being than equipment obviously but by analogy this argument could be extended to humans. How are humans intelligible if you don't account for their teleology, or what they're striving towards/seeking, or how thy understand and interpret themselves in what they are doing, etc.? They are similarly completely unintelligible. — bloodninja
the majority of people on here don't think there is a "human nature" — bloodninja
I think the virtues and vices are grounded in how our cultures are organised, and how they function. Is this arbitrary? Not really. However, I think it does entail that I am a cultural relativist. — bloodninja
If there is no human nature to ground ethical theory, then what other ethical position is left but cultural relativism? — bloodninja
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.