RCSaunders wrote: ↑Mon Jun 07, 2021 9:56 pm
If you say the way to find out what you should want is, "anthropogeny first, then of teleology, and then of ethics," instead of reason, "since you say, "what ends are, or should be, rationality never tells you," what faculty do you use for anthropogeny, teleology, and ethics?
They can only be premised on
what you actually believe to be true about those questions (anthropogeny, teleology, ethics). There can be no other grounds than reality itself.
Now, some such beliefs are more plausible, based the evidence reality provides, than are others. And some are not plausible at all, perhaps. But people are odd: sometimes, they insist on acting on a set of beliefs they may even secretly strongly suspect isn't true.
For example, Socialists today have every reason to know that their creed is contrary to the realities of human nature, sociology and history, but simply refuse to accept any data as sufficient evidence to abandon their Socialism. As you've probably seen, it won't matter how many cases of failed Socialist countries you cite, or how many people have died under such regimes, or the fact that not a single case of a successful Socialist economy has existed in human history; the Socialists will persist, saying that none of the former regimes are truly "Socialist," or that no country is a worthy exemplar, or that your anthropological analysis of why Socialism is doomed to fail is wrong, and the next regime will succeed...They continue to believe their dogma, despite all realities.
But there is a cost to fighting reality: it's called "delusion," and it leads to confusion and inability to address reality effectively. Sometimes, as in the case of Socialism, it even kills people. However, it seems these are prices the Socialists are willing to accept, in order to persist in their ideology. You can't always cure that.
Anthropogeny, teleology and ethics provide a "map" for rational behaviour. But they can't guarantee rational
people. Some are just not, and prefer to live even with beliefs that are inconsistent or completely in defiance of the available data.
So it's not automatic. People can choose to accept what reality is telling them, or they can reject it.