No need to apologize. I enjoyed the exchange. I am new to your work, so i did not realize you have already gotten into lots of exchanges like this. Have a nice day!
-
-
Replying to @adamckolasinski
I need a Twitter break. Thanks for being understanding. I shall now chill.pic.twitter.com/OcWc2dy8CB
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Just a question 4 you after you come back from your break. Have you written anything justifying your rejection of Hume's is/ought divide? I'd love to read the argument, so please send me the reference.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @adamckolasinski
No, because I hate this topic. The argument is that everything comes down to 'is' in the end because everything, including our morality is biologically based. But it's just too complicated and multi-faceted to trace everything back and we have to make arguments instead abt ought.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @adamckolasinski
We don't know enough but if you believe that the most objective morality we can get is an optimum human morality, it takes a huge number of factors to establish exactly what that is so we have to make arguments based on human wellbeing.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Since you've not written on it, who do you think has made the best case for your position, or some close approximation to it? Sam Harris? Anyone else?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @adamckolasinski
Sam Harris, probably, yes. The Moral Landscape.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @adamckolasinski
Because 'ought' comes from human brains too and we don't choose to have morality so its appearance comes down to something that is.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Maybe Harris has an answer, but if there are no oughts, only is's, then it seems the logical conclusion is nihilism. And I don't think that's where you stand. But I'll go read the book before commenting further.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @adamckolasinski
No, I don't see why knowing where my morality came from indicates nihilism. We already know it is there, that we didn't chose it and that we can't lose it without a frontal lobotomy. Trying to work down to what is the best for humans is something we'll be doing forever.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
But to suggest it comes elsewhere from human brains which are essentially a load of biological facts, is not supported by evidence so there are right answers even if we never reach them. The best we can do is go with SH's premise on the wellbeing of conscious creatures & reason.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.