Imagine you are part of a game, the only rule of which is that it never repeats; every moment of it is unique, occurs only once, and only you get to experience it. Now ask yourself : Would you know whether you had free will or not? And if you did—would it make any difference?
In philosophy, strictly speaking that would be metaphysics. In the real world, only science. Ethicists (such as Peterson's) metaphysics is paltry at best, though he conflates it with meta-ethics. This does not make him a bad ethicist, however.
-
-
My point, the basic laws will promulgate objectively ethical behavior as "correct". No abstractions, but directly. The subjective experience at the moment might vary dramatically. But one path leads, given fundamental laws, to Subj/Obj satisfaction.
-
I struggle to follow your reasoning. What laws?
-
I suddenly sense, I might have mindlessly introduced more "rules" to your game than you initially described. - I implicitly assumed myself inserted into the game with my current mental faculties, same cause/effect setup as experienced now. (my mistake?)
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.