Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

Deontology vs. Utilitarianism

phiLockeraptor
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2014 9:05:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Rather than posting my own thoughts, I'll simply ask what the readers of this forum have to say.

Whaat philosophy is better, in terms of both logic and daily loving?
"Philosophy is a great conversation that never ends"

Writing for this website ----> www.dailyfreethinker.com
headphonegut
Posts: 4,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2014 9:33:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/14/2014 9:05:08 PM, phiLockeraptor wrote:
Rather than posting my own thoughts, I'll simply ask what the readers of this forum have to say.

Whaat philosophy is better, in terms of both logic and daily loving?

probably zen.
crying to soldiers coming home to their dogs why do I torment myself with these videos?
phiLockeraptor
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2014 10:18:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/14/2014 9:33:35 PM, headphonegut wrote:
At 12/14/2014 9:05:08 PM, phiLockeraptor wrote:
Rather than posting my own thoughts, I'll simply ask what the readers of this forum have to say.

Whaat philosophy is better, in terms of both logic and daily loving?

probably zen.

Elaborate...?
"Philosophy is a great conversation that never ends"

Writing for this website ----> www.dailyfreethinker.com
Romanii
Posts: 4,851
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2014 2:05:06 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/14/2014 9:05:08 PM, phiLockeraptor wrote:
Rather than posting my own thoughts, I'll simply ask what the readers of this forum have to say.

Whaat philosophy is better, in terms of both logic and daily loving?

Logically, neither of them are sound, as is the case with all secular ethical systems. Objective morality can't exist from a naturalistic perspective because none of the meta-ethical premises which ground any ethical system can successfully be justified.

I don't know what you mean by "daily loving", but I will say that the flexible nature of utilitarianism fits better with our wishy-washy ethical intuitions.
phiLockeraptor
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2014 10:54:40 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/15/2014 2:05:06 AM, Romanii wrote:
At 12/14/2014 9:05:08 PM, phiLockeraptor wrote:
Rather than posting my own thoughts, I'll simply ask what the readers of this forum have to say.

Whaat philosophy is better, in terms of both logic and daily loving?

Logically, neither of them are sound, as is the case with all secular ethical systems. Objective morality can't exist from a naturalistic perspective because none of the meta-ethical premises which ground any ethical system can successfully be justified.

I don't know what you mean by "daily loving", but I will say that the flexible nature of utilitarianism fits better with our wishy-washy ethical intuitions.

I apologize for the grammatical errors; I was on mobile. I meant to say "living".

On objective morality: I'm of the opinion that objective morality can/has been reached through Kantian Constructivism, and that the reason we won't accept it is because it falls short of what we want "morality" to encompass. The objectivity is there, it just leads to an unfulfilling conclusion.
"Philosophy is a great conversation that never ends"

Writing for this website ----> www.dailyfreethinker.com