What about those amazing individuals we all know who seem to not only want but need to put other peoples wants ahead of their own? — Mark Dennis
Good is an appraisal of value. — Mark Dennis
Good is an appraisal of value. — Mark Dennis
However ethics is the study of external values whilst morality is the study of internal principles. — Mark Dennis
I know you said they put other people's wants ahead their own, but since this is their most importantly wanted thing, their wants to satisfy other people's wants takes precedence over wanting to want their own wants satisfied before other people's. — god must be atheist
I should have thought that morality and ethics are complete synonyms, unless and if not separated by the author and specifying the differences. What you wrote, Mark Dennis, seems to purport that there is a difference in common, accepted English and in ethical philosophy as such. That is not true, methinks, but if you already knew that, I apologize. — god must be atheist
Does my use of the word problematic mean something that is impossible? — Mark Dennis
According to the dictionary
Morality
noun
principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour — Andrew4Handel
Oxford definition is okay if you're speaking to Lay people. — Mark Dennis
Finally if the philosophical meaning of morality is far removed the dictionary definition then it becomes meaningless and disconnected from what almost everyone else considers to be morality. — Andrew4Handel
don't know if you are trying to claim there is a consensus on the definition of morality. there is not a consensus and hence that undermines making moral claims. — Andrew4Handel
(...)Moral ecology makes no such claims. It merely describes differences between malignant, benign and beneficial moral and ethical ideologies(...) — Mark Dennis
No one is trying to claim authority with their moral views and observations, they are all guides — Mark Dennis
If you want to get at the true meat of the matter from you perspective; you need to ask yourself what Meaning and Meaningless mean and question their very nature. Then ask if anything has meaning and ask if anything is meaningless. — Mark Dennis
↪god must be atheist
I should have thought that morality and ethics are complete synonyms, unless and if not separated by the author and specifying the differences. What you wrote, Mark Dennis, seems to purport that there is a difference in common, accepted English and in ethical philosophy as such. That is not true, methinks, but if you already knew that, I apologize.
— god must be atheist
No you shouldnt have thought that because that would be wrong. There is a difference which I have already described. Ethics and morals are not synonomous with each other but are both studies of the same thing which is value. This is 101 level stuff here you can't really make this stuff up, it is free knowledge you can easily find Here and Here. — Mark Dennis
I am making claims about the definition of the fields of study if you want it even more simply than I have laid out; you are practicing morality as a field of study by asking the question "What is morality". I can't make this any simpler. — Mark Dennis
The first problems I can see with Pragmatic ethics and Moral ecology is that they make unprovable assertions such as that moral behaviour exists and it evolves and involves progress. — Andrew4Handel
556
↪Andrew4Handel
Finally if the philosophical meaning of morality is far removed the dictionary definition then it becomes meaningless and disconnected from what almost everyone else considers to be morality.
— Andrew4Handel
Except it isn't far removed; just expanded upon. Morality is the study of individual value preferences and ethics is the study of external rule systems and their value structures. — Mark Dennis
I am making claims about the definition of the fields of study — Mark Dennis
Morality is problematic further because people overcomplicate the concepts involved, in order to justify their pet theories about morality. — god must be atheist
The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy states that the word "ethics" is "commonly used interchangeably with 'morality' ... and sometimes it is used more narrowly to mean the moral principles of a particular tradition, group or individual." Paul and Elder state that most people confuse ethics with behaving in accordance with social conventions, religious beliefs and the law and don't treat ethics as a stand-alone concept. — god must be atheist
Generally, it is accepted that you can't define a concept or a word by using the word itself to describe its meaning.
Morality is not defined, and is not definable. It is like "love" or "life" or "god"; the concept is immediately understood by all humans, but the concept escapes definition.
Therefore there may be a way to study morality, much like there are ways to study life or god or love; but there is no authority on moral philosophy. Studying life or love has biology and psychology as sciences to back up claims. Religion and morals / ethics / morality have no scientific back-up as their practices and theories lead to self-contradictory claims (as per, for the instance of morality / ethics, the Baby Hitler example that precedes this post.) — god must be atheist
do claim that moral philosophers who have earned Ph.D.-s in philosophy overcomplicate things, because earlier I showed that morality and ethics are fields that have no scientific backing, and the claims made are all individualistic; no consensus exists on what morality is, and the principle of morality is absolutely absent from human sphere of thought. — god must be atheist
Mark Dennis, although you were very careful in making my prediction come true, meaning that a post of mine will be completely ignored for content, inadvertently above you gave two answers to one point taken from my post which is ignored vehemently and adamantly — god must be atheist
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.