On the future of Ethics
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2016 9:43 pm
The classic philosophical question, “If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, did it make a sound?” cannot sensibly be answered "yes" or "no" until a definition is given for the word "sound." For that is what the question is about: How are we to understand the word, "sound"?
Once a definition is offered, then one may respond in the affirmative, or in the negative, and actually be communicating.
That question, as I see it, is the prototype for all philosophical inquiry. We may generalize from that classic question and come to the awareness - and this is Meta-Philosophy now - that doing philosophy (in the modern sense) is taking a vague concept, such as in this case, "sound", and analyzing it and clarifying it, until it becomes more-exact.
If it ever gets to be precise, then it is ready for science ... for becoming a term in a network of interrelated terms which constitute the frame-of-reference known as 'a scientific theory.' Philosophy clarifies and analyzes vague (and ambiguous) concepts; science clarifies and analyzes precise concepts. They are both alike in that they deal with concepts. They differ as to the kinds of concepts with which they grapple.
A scientific theory has real explanatory power, or at least gets a little closer to being in touch with reality - as confirmed by the technologies that ensue when appliers (engineers and designers) are inspired by the theory to create something that enhances the quality of our lives.
Historically, philosophy has been "the mother of the sciences." Astrology led to Astronomy, Alchemy led to Chemistry, Philosophy of Mind led to Psychology, Natural Philosophy led to Physics and Climatology; and some fine day Moral Philosophy will result in a Science of Ethics, which will not be merely descriptive (as to what norms various cultures live by today and in the past) but will be also prescriptive (normative), for it will suggest guidelines for rational folks to live by that will maximize the quality and duration of life for normal people who take advantage of the new knowledge. In fact, it could be that already Moral Psychology is the experimental branch of Ethics, the science. It is sometimes known as the Science of Moral Sense. I like the name "Ethics" for it, as a partner to "Physics."
For further details on the latter theme, see: ETHICS; A College Course - http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/ ... Course.pdf
Then see: BASIC ETHICS; a systematic approach - http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BASIC%20ETHICS.pdf
and after that, see the latest update, the magnum opus which may be read on a free Kindle downloaded program. The book has a rather-affordable price set on it; the publisher required that it have a price:
See How To Live Successfully - https://www.amazon.com/LIVING-SUCCESSFU ... B01NBKS42C
A critic who was wise enough to study a paper I once wrote entitled, Living Well, and who upon focusing on the analogy which spoke of the survival-value of cells of the human body being healthy, asked: "what if reason demands that in the interest of survival of the organism one body part, say a hopelessly damaged leg, must be amputated?" {Is it possible that one might be carrying an analogy too far?}
The point I was attempting to convey was that we all need each other as our support group, for each of us has unique talents and gifts that might serve to improve the quality of life for the human species, and thus perhaps for you or I as a member of this species.
Perhaps the questioner was implying that there is the 2% of the human race which constitutes the madmen, and the sociopaths (both men and women) who would hurt the rest of us, and was merely asking what should be done about them?
If that is what was meant by the question, I would reply: Lock them away! Get them out of circulation, away from civil society. {Although I want the personnel of the mental hospitals, the prisons, and the detention centers, to be screened before hiring to help insure that they are civil also.}
In a chapter entitled "Ethical Principles" in that third work cited above, the Kindle document, you can find a list of some actual guidelines for living a trouble-free and good life, one filled with harmonious interactions with those whom we encounter in daily life. The motivation for research into scientific Ethics is to make the world work for everyone while depriving no one.
Comments welcome....
Once a definition is offered, then one may respond in the affirmative, or in the negative, and actually be communicating.
That question, as I see it, is the prototype for all philosophical inquiry. We may generalize from that classic question and come to the awareness - and this is Meta-Philosophy now - that doing philosophy (in the modern sense) is taking a vague concept, such as in this case, "sound", and analyzing it and clarifying it, until it becomes more-exact.
If it ever gets to be precise, then it is ready for science ... for becoming a term in a network of interrelated terms which constitute the frame-of-reference known as 'a scientific theory.' Philosophy clarifies and analyzes vague (and ambiguous) concepts; science clarifies and analyzes precise concepts. They are both alike in that they deal with concepts. They differ as to the kinds of concepts with which they grapple.
A scientific theory has real explanatory power, or at least gets a little closer to being in touch with reality - as confirmed by the technologies that ensue when appliers (engineers and designers) are inspired by the theory to create something that enhances the quality of our lives.
Historically, philosophy has been "the mother of the sciences." Astrology led to Astronomy, Alchemy led to Chemistry, Philosophy of Mind led to Psychology, Natural Philosophy led to Physics and Climatology; and some fine day Moral Philosophy will result in a Science of Ethics, which will not be merely descriptive (as to what norms various cultures live by today and in the past) but will be also prescriptive (normative), for it will suggest guidelines for rational folks to live by that will maximize the quality and duration of life for normal people who take advantage of the new knowledge. In fact, it could be that already Moral Psychology is the experimental branch of Ethics, the science. It is sometimes known as the Science of Moral Sense. I like the name "Ethics" for it, as a partner to "Physics."
For further details on the latter theme, see: ETHICS; A College Course - http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/ ... Course.pdf
Then see: BASIC ETHICS; a systematic approach - http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BASIC%20ETHICS.pdf
and after that, see the latest update, the magnum opus which may be read on a free Kindle downloaded program. The book has a rather-affordable price set on it; the publisher required that it have a price:
See How To Live Successfully - https://www.amazon.com/LIVING-SUCCESSFU ... B01NBKS42C
A critic who was wise enough to study a paper I once wrote entitled, Living Well, and who upon focusing on the analogy which spoke of the survival-value of cells of the human body being healthy, asked: "what if reason demands that in the interest of survival of the organism one body part, say a hopelessly damaged leg, must be amputated?" {Is it possible that one might be carrying an analogy too far?}
The point I was attempting to convey was that we all need each other as our support group, for each of us has unique talents and gifts that might serve to improve the quality of life for the human species, and thus perhaps for you or I as a member of this species.
Perhaps the questioner was implying that there is the 2% of the human race which constitutes the madmen, and the sociopaths (both men and women) who would hurt the rest of us, and was merely asking what should be done about them?
If that is what was meant by the question, I would reply: Lock them away! Get them out of circulation, away from civil society. {Although I want the personnel of the mental hospitals, the prisons, and the detention centers, to be screened before hiring to help insure that they are civil also.}
In a chapter entitled "Ethical Principles" in that third work cited above, the Kindle document, you can find a list of some actual guidelines for living a trouble-free and good life, one filled with harmonious interactions with those whom we encounter in daily life. The motivation for research into scientific Ethics is to make the world work for everyone while depriving no one.
Comments welcome....