Stefan MolyneuxVerified account

‘Should’ is like ‘tomorrow’. It is a concept. Some shoulds can be good and helpful, and some shoulds are destructive and pull us down. There are good ‘shoulds’, but be careful not to be a should-head.

You should use should if should , should be the correct word to use

Thank you, come again!

I would say by virtue of existing that it's written in our DNA.

Even leaving any religions aside, living beings have been evolving with the very explicit purpose of creating and raising offspring. But let's not do that because reasons /logic

Firstly nature doesn't write, secondly the word "could" has options where "should" does not & if nature could write it would be 99% certain that the birth giver with clucky hormones would do the rearing of their offspring

Your concern with Hume's critic of normative statements is duly noted. However there are deeper concerns related to normative ethics of which this is merely an expression. The modern loss of ethical telos, due to loss of esteem for traditional identity, a result of relativism.

Should is a normative imperative, and without a common sense of what the purpose or goal of ethics is, there is no way to establish normative imperatives. Modern Nihilism makes no room for ethics, apart from machinery of religion seen as oppression and lies.

There is no "objective" law of nature that says you should follow the rules of the road, or be careful with power tools. The sun and moon don't care if you crash and die or cut off your thumb.

"Should" is a word that describes what is good to do, that which "ought" to be done. Allowing a standard for "good" is unacceptable to the Left. They have to be able to move the goalposts at will.

Deception 101 Something horrible takes place against the US’s way of life. Blame it on the left and only the Left. Don’t look further at the owners of both parties and never mention the pattern of (((people))) involved. Wash, rinse, repeat.