4 ms·
Moral 'facts' require a universal standard of morality. It's hard to come up with a truly universal standard. The best answer I've seen is: Man's life. "Sinc
by EarthLaunch 12y ago
Moral 'facts' require a universal standard of morality. It's hard to come up with a truly universal standard. The best answer I've seen is: Man's life.
"Since reason is man’s basic means of survival, that which is proper to the life of a rational being is the good; that which negates, opposes or destroys it is the evil." -Ayn Rand [1]
[1] http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/morality.html http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/morality.html
- icebraining 12y agoThat doesn't set a standard, it just moves the discussion to "what is proper to the life a rational being", which is still completely subjective.
- EarthLaunch 12y agoIt progresses the discussion to there, by being a first principle of morality. From there, with a definition of rationality, "what is proper to the life a rational being" can be answered. For example, death is not proper to the life a rational being. From that follows certain things to avoid. Using this logic, those things would be morally wrong.
- icebraining 12y agoFor example, death is not proper to the life a rational being. Why not?
- EarthLaunch 12y agoI didn't just assert that, it was based on the preceding logic. "Why not" is answered by what I proposed in my previous comment. Not up for debating it with you further. With a name like icebraining, have you ever wondered if you're the baddy? [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn1VxaMEjRU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn1VxaMEjRU