2 ms·

Even so, you can ask whether a given moral code is more principled than another (e.g. in the sense of having some algebraic structure), and use that to investig

Even so, you can ask whether a given moral code is more principled than another (e.g. in the sense of having some algebraic structure), and use that to investigate what might be considered "more natural". For example, one might argue that if a "natural" right exists, then it ought to be symmetric under exchange of humans (or sentient beings or whatever). It's then "more natural" to conclude that you have a right to perform actions that have no interaction or consequences for other humans (e.g. to sing a copyrighted song to yourself in an empty room or downloading a song that you already have on CD but don't feel like ripping yourself) than those that do (e.g. taking food from someone because you'd otherwise starve).

dragonwriter 3y ago
> Even so, you can ask whether a given moral code is more principled than another What does “more principled” mean of a moral code? How does one quantify “degree of principledness”? > and use that to investigate what might be considered "more natural". What does the preceding (being “more principled”) have to do with being “more natural”? And what significance does being “more natural” have? And none of that has any relevance to what is usually described as “natural rights”; its like taking existing words and coming upnwith entirely novel meanings and then a whole architecture around them, which is pretty advanced equivocation.