3 ms·
Every ethicical framework has issues at the edges. Whether they be based in categorical imperatives or utilitarianism. > utilitarianism (ethics come from the o
by qiskit 5y ago
Every ethicical framework has issues at the edges. Whether they be based in categorical imperatives or utilitarianism.
> utilitarianism (ethics come from the outcome) is the better option.
Is murder ethical then, if the murderer uses the victim's organs to save the lives of 10 other people?
You always have to watch out for the edge cases lest you get cut.
At the end of the day, all ethics is rooted in selfishness. The weighing of what we want to happen to us, what we want to do to others and what we don't want to happen to us. There is no universal or natural or absolute ethical framework. It's just a human invention born out of human selfishness.
- quetzthecoatl 5y ago>Is murder ethical then, if the murderer uses the victim's organs to save the lives of 10 other people? Even better, just kill everyone for a greener earth.
- nisegami 5y agoThe natural conclusion of negative utilitarianism is the intentional extinguishing of all life
- soundnote 5y agoI like specks of dust and torture.
- beaconstudios 5y agoI disagree that selfishness is the root of ethics; I think the root of ethics is the desire for a higher good, for the world to be a better place for the people living in it, which is fundamentally altruistic. I agree that moral frameworks are more of a guideline than a ruleset because no one model is going to be both simple and map onto messy reality. Ie, like all models, they're reductive but can still be useful. My point was that deontology is just an appeal to rigid consistency, where at least utilitarianism takes context into account, leading to better flexibility to match up with reality.