PrimalZed
PrimalZed t1_j9kjbl0 wrote
Reply to comment by Judgethunder in Thought experiments claim to use our intuitive responses to generate philosophical insights. But these scenarios are deceptive. Moral intuitions depend heavily on context and the individual. by IAI_Admin
"The continuation of humanity is inherently valuable" is not objective. Yes, it is a value that most people hold, but that does not make it an objective truth. At best, that makes it a common axiom.
That you had to qualify "nearly everyone" holds that value itself demonstrates that it is subjective, not objective.
There is no fundamental universal property that makes humanity inherently valuable. Humanity can cease, and the universe will continue on just fine. We can say that's bad, and construct our morals around that axiom, but that doesn't make the axiom objectively true.
PrimalZed t1_j9k6f1m wrote
Reply to comment by Judgethunder in Thought experiments claim to use our intuitive responses to generate philosophical insights. But these scenarios are deceptive. Moral intuitions depend heavily on context and the individual. by IAI_Admin
A social or moral desire being "emergent products of evolution" does not make them objective. It's not even true that all morals are emergent products of evolution.
To give an extreme example to quickly cut to the core here, "We shouldn't press the button that kills all humans" is not an objective statement. It presumes that human life or the continuation of humanity are inherently valuable.
Your position that there is objective morality would be easily proven if you can give an example of an objectively true moral statement.
PrimalZed t1_j9jsup8 wrote
Reply to comment by Judgethunder in Thought experiments claim to use our intuitive responses to generate philosophical insights. But these scenarios are deceptive. Moral intuitions depend heavily on context and the individual. by IAI_Admin
There is no universally true moral statement. There is no way to definitively prove any moral statement. Hence, there is no objective morality.
PrimalZed t1_j9jlc9o wrote
Reply to Thought experiments claim to use our intuitive responses to generate philosophical insights. But these scenarios are deceptive. Moral intuitions depend heavily on context and the individual. by IAI_Admin
> First, often people respond to them differently across demographic groups, particularly different cultures, and second; small, irrelevant changes in how thought experiments are worded can change entirely how we respond to them.
These are just known aspects of ethics, not unexpected features only present in thought experiments. If anything, the use of thought experiments (including framing) to expose and analyze these things is useful, not detrimental.
It seems like these objections to thought experiments would only make sense if the response - and ethics in general - is thought to be objective.
PrimalZed t1_j98qurj wrote
Reply to comment by ajamesmccarthy in I spent 20 hours shooting the Horsehead nebula to create my most intricately detailed photo of this region. This area is surprisingly large, and if it were brighter it would appear much larger than the full moon. Make sure you zoom in! [OC] by ajamesmccarthy
> That's not because this area isn't incredibly vibrant, but because your eyes can't resolve color when things are this faint. It's like trying to see the color in flowers in moonlight, you can't.
Is that to say that the red haze here is stuff reflecting light, not emanating it? If so, what is the light it's reflecting emanated from?
PrimalZed t1_iufuoh7 wrote
Reply to Built like a brick by diaozhazha58
Isn't everyone in Minecraft 6'6" with arms that are 9 inches thick?
PrimalZed t1_jacmghe wrote
Reply to My coworker draws these on his breaks by Kuniv
Hard to WASD without fingers. So W it is!