Related to that I’ve got a pet theory that if you take the high values of each literally, they are entirely uncontroversial
My sense is that this assertion can be empirically falsified for all levels of abstraction below “Do what is right.”
But in a particular society or sub-culture, more specific assertions can be uncontroversial—in an unhelpful in solving any problems kind of way. That was what I took away from Applause lights.
My sense is that this assertion can be empirically falsified for all levels of abstraction below “Do what is right.”
Indeed, this is one of many reasons why I am starting to think “go meta” is really, really good advice.
Edit: Clarification, what I mean is that I think virtue ethics, deontology, utilitarianism, and the less popular ethical theories agree way more than their proponents think they do. At this point this is still a guess.
I don’t follow. Discussing theories of morality is already quite meta from the object level moral decisions we face in our daily lives. Going another level of meta is unlikely to illuminate—it certainly doesn’t seem likely to be helpful in doing the impossible.
My sense is that this assertion can be empirically falsified for all levels of abstraction below “Do what is right.”
But in a particular society or sub-culture, more specific assertions can be uncontroversial—in an unhelpful in solving any problems kind of way. That was what I took away from Applause lights.
Indeed, this is one of many reasons why I am starting to think “go meta” is really, really good advice.
Edit: Clarification, what I mean is that I think virtue ethics, deontology, utilitarianism, and the less popular ethical theories agree way more than their proponents think they do. At this point this is still a guess.
I don’t follow. Discussing theories of morality is already quite meta from the object level moral decisions we face in our daily lives. Going another level of meta is unlikely to illuminate—it certainly doesn’t seem likely to be helpful in doing the impossible.