Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

Merits of Normative Ethics

ExistentialBullcrap
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2011 8:24:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
What is your take on the merits/foundation of normative ethics?

I personally think, as a subscriber of Expressivism and its ensuing corollaries, they are undue and constrictive systemization of a complex phenomenon.

What does the debaters think?
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2011 8:58:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/30/2011 8:38:14 PM, ExistentialBullcrap wrote:
^ Lol you are implying that metaethical inquiry is existential bullcrap?:

Bingo was his name-O
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2011 11:04:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/30/2011 8:24:02 PM, ExistentialBullcrap wrote:
What is your take on the merits/foundation of normative ethics?


Not sure what you're asking. I'm a moral realist, though, if that helps...
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2011 2:30:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/30/2011 8:24:02 PM, ExistentialBullcrap wrote:
What is your take on the merits/foundation of normative ethics?

I personally think, as a subscriber of Expressivism and its ensuing corollaries, they are undue and constrictive systemization of a complex phenomenon.

What does the debaters think?

hmmm. well- I have a pretty limited knowledge of this, but since nobody else is chiming in...

I'd have to agree with you regarding all but virtue ethics. Primarily because it acknowledges that there is often more than one good way to deal with a situation. You're simply encouraged to uphold and habituate virtues. The good habits encouraged are difficult to argue with- courage, honesty, temperance, justice, charity, etc. And if you wanted to argue with one- I don't see why you couldn't. Virtue ethics seems more true to life than the rest. It does not force you to be impartial, as consequentialism and ESPECIALLY the categorical imperative do- as if you were some kind of robot following a moral math problem you can never stray from. As you probably already know, The Categorical Imperative could conceivably force you to help a murderer find your hiding friend in your very own house. And to this criticism, Kant responded, "yup." So yes, The Categorical Imperative, in particular, seems like a very broken system.

And that is my rookie opinion :)
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2011 1:49:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/30/2011 11:04:17 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
Not sure what you're asking. I'm a moral realist, though, if that helps...

Me too :P
President of DDO
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2011 2:13:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/30/2011 8:24:02 PM, ExistentialBullcrap wrote:
What is your take on the merits/foundation of normative ethics?

I personally think, as a subscriber of Expressivism and its ensuing corollaries, they are undue and constrictive systemization of a complex phenomenon.

What does the debaters think?

meh, if its a complex phenomenon, wouldn't it be to our benefit to try to systematize our understanding of it? especially since our moral beliefs (and those of people around us) tend to have a large impact on our lives...
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2011 2:28:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/17/2011 2:13:24 PM, belle wrote:
At 11/30/2011 8:24:02 PM, ExistentialBullcrap wrote:
What is your take on the merits/foundation of normative ethics?

I personally think, as a subscriber of Expressivism and its ensuing corollaries, they are undue and constrictive systemization of a complex phenomenon.

What does the debaters think?

meh, if its a complex phenomenon, wouldn't it be to our benefit to try to systematize our understanding of it? especially since our moral beliefs (and those of people around us) tend to have a large impact on our lives...

It could be beneficial. But from where I'm standing, any "systematizing" done on morality should take into account our human emotions and partiality toward people we love. Virtue ethics does that- the others don't.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2011 6:47:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/17/2011 1:49:12 PM, Danielle wrote:
At 11/30/2011 11:04:17 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
Not sure what you're asking. I'm a moral realist, though, if that helps...

Me too :P

Are you really? For some reason, I had the impression that you weren't...
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2011 9:50:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/17/2011 6:47:39 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/17/2011 1:49:12 PM, Danielle wrote:
At 11/30/2011 11:04:17 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
Not sure what you're asking. I'm a moral realist, though, if that helps...

Me too :P

Are you really? For some reason, I had the impression that you weren't...

Thirded.

Or, more accurately, I'm Aristotelian.

The OP was stating the same nonsense most atheists and nihilists on this forum claim -- "good," "right," and other such terms are meaningless, and therefore, morals are just rules we ascribe to subjective ideals that we impose on others.

To which I say that three members so far, myself included, have indicated in some way that they completely disagree.

In my case, I'll just leave it that if you claim Expressivism, you must apply that to the meaning of all words and forego language completely, as it's just a meaningless collection of sounds and rhythms.