>Even simple enough math starting from formal axioms are incomplete (Godel) [1]. Real world ethics, starting by ethical assumptions will be 1000 times as full o

>Even simple enough math starting from formal axioms are incomplete (Godel) [1]. Real world ethics, starting by ethical assumptions will be 1000 times as full of holes and inconsistencies. Just because a mathematical system like set theory is incomplete (can't prove its own consistency), that doesn't mean it's "full of holes and inconsistencies". And just because a system cannot prove itself consistent, doesn't mean it can't be proven consistent in some larger system (for instance how we can use ZFC to prove that Peano arithmetic is consistent).