E
edwest2
Guest
Apparently, there’s no such thing as too much money or contentment.
csmonitor.com/2008/0915/p16s03-wmgn.html
God bless,
Ed
csmonitor.com/2008/0915/p16s03-wmgn.html
God bless,
Ed
- Status
K
KathleenElsie
Guest
Morals and ethics take a back seat to greed and relativism.
P
peregrinus_WA
Guest
Greed and Relativism are the new Morals and Ethics.Morals and ethics take a back seat to greed and relativism.
R
ribozyme
Guest
I guess too many people are starting to read John Galt’s speech to derive their morality. Greed is perfectly moral in such a system.Greed and Relativism are the new Morals and Ethics.
But do not worry, that is not “relativistic morality” instead it is “objective.”
R
ribozyme
Guest
I am a negative utilitarian consequentialist. How is that relativism?
As a utilitarian, I largely believe the outcomes are very important in ethical decisions. Certain outcomes are preferred such as the reduction of suffering. I do not see how that view could be deemed relativism as it states that certain situations are to be avoided. You may indeed be correct when if you think that most secularists are relativists as most secularists that I have met are not utilitarians.
To reiterate, how is utilitarian ethics a relativist ethical system? Utilitarian ethics, of course, rejections any instruction from “natural law” and simply focuses on the satisfaction of preferences.
(One can argue that the term utility is hard to define (most people would simply say “happiness,”) but I do acknowledge the difficulties of defining it. However, I define it negatively and say that “utility” is antithetical to suffering. As a negative utilitarian, I believe the reduction of suffering should have a high ethical priority.)
As a utilitarian, I largely believe the outcomes are very important in ethical decisions. Certain outcomes are preferred such as the reduction of suffering. I do not see how that view could be deemed relativism as it states that certain situations are to be avoided. You may indeed be correct when if you think that most secularists are relativists as most secularists that I have met are not utilitarians.
To reiterate, how is utilitarian ethics a relativist ethical system? Utilitarian ethics, of course, rejections any instruction from “natural law” and simply focuses on the satisfaction of preferences.
(One can argue that the term utility is hard to define (most people would simply say “happiness,”) but I do acknowledge the difficulties of defining it. However, I define it negatively and say that “utility” is antithetical to suffering. As a negative utilitarian, I believe the reduction of suffering should have a high ethical priority.)
- Status