Well, if I am so ignorant then how come you are agreeing with me?Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 10:02 am You are so ignorant of what is going on in reality with morality and ethics.
Note what I had proposed with the use of 'ought' is already being practiced by humanity at present via the UN.
The UN has already signed various 'oughts' re slavery, racism and other human rights issue as a guide for individual nations to follow up.
You are openly stating that the IS->OUGHT gap is wrong precisely because in practice it's the OUGHT-> IS gap. It's the gap of HOW.
We ought to stop slavery. HOW?
We ought to stop racism. HOW?
We ought to stop human rights violations. HOW?
You are trying to formalize the PRACTICE of morality/ethics? You are trying to define what moralists already do?Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 10:02 am What we are discussing is to establish a formal framework and improve on the current reality and practices of morality and ethics.
How do you intend to do that when you have never actually PRACTICED morality/ethics at social scale? You only philosophize about it.
The framework is going to be written by the practitioners of morality/ethics. Those who have the power to actually change/implement the structures of society. Those who have the power and know-HOW to turn an OUGHT into an IS.
The moral philosophers are the running commentary, the peanut gallery (as always).