Complexity in morality is like consistency in truth. Let me explain.
If all of your beliefs are exactly correct, they will be consistent. But if you force all your beliefs to be consistent, there’s no guarantee they’ll be correct. You can end up fixing a right thing to make it consistent with a wrong thing.
Just so with morality; humans value complex things, but this complexity is a result, not a cause, and not something to strive for in and of itself.
Good point, however note that we call systems of consistent beliefs ‘mathematics’; it is unlinked from reality, but is extremely useful just as long as one understands the sort of truth that is there to the consistency. The consistency produces conditional truth—truth of a statement that “if A is true, then B is true” . Without mathematics, there is no belief improving.
Complexity in morality is like consistency in truth. Let me explain.
If all of your beliefs are exactly correct, they will be consistent. But if you force all your beliefs to be consistent, there’s no guarantee they’ll be correct. You can end up fixing a right thing to make it consistent with a wrong thing.
Just so with morality; humans value complex things, but this complexity is a result, not a cause, and not something to strive for in and of itself.
Good point, however note that we call systems of consistent beliefs ‘mathematics’; it is unlinked from reality, but is extremely useful just as long as one understands the sort of truth that is there to the consistency. The consistency produces conditional truth—truth of a statement that “if A is true, then B is true” . Without mathematics, there is no belief improving.