3 ms·

Depends on your system of morality. For example, you could have a system of morality that has the axiom: "advertising is inherently bad." In this case, it's har

Depends on your system of morality. For example, you could have a system of morality that has the axiom: "advertising is inherently bad." In this case, it's hard to imagine it would be justifiable. An opposite system of morality also exists, of course, that says advertising is inherently good. Since there is no objective standard of morality, and since "morality" is just a fancy word for "things that people consider good or bad," we probably just have to look out into the world and see whether advertising is against the morals of most. Given that we see little great outrage over the use of advertising, even among those who are aware of its risks, I have to conclude that advertising is morally justifiable.

ableal 11y ago
If you replace the word with something currently more unpopular, and rerun the sentence, you may see a hole in your argument.
johnchristopher 11y ago
> Since there is no objective standard of morality, and since "morality" is just a fancy word for "things that people consider good or bad," we probably just have to look out into the world and see whether advertising is against the morals of most. Given that we see little great outrage over the use of advertising, even among those who are aware of its risks, I have to conclude that advertising is morally justifiable. This is a bold statement (italics) and you run into a circular reasoning by the end of that sentence (advertising is morally justifiable because some people are okay with it). May I suggest the following summer read: http://www.amazon.com/Moral-Tribes-Emotion-Reason-Between/dp/0143126059/ref=mt_paperback?_encoding=UTF8&me= http://www.amazon.com/Moral-Tribes-Emotion-Reason-Between/dp... and http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jan/17/moral-tribes-joshua-greene-review http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jan/17/moral-tribes-jo... and then http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115279/joshua-greenes-moral-tribes-reviewed-thomas-nagel http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115279/joshua-greenes-mor...
dredmorbius 11y ago
you could have a system of morality that has the axiom But that's a strawman. It's not the argument being made here. Or by the numerous other critics of advertising: Adam Curtis, Jerry Mander, Neil Postman, etc. The remainder of your arguments follow a similar train.

ableal 11y ago

If you replace the word with something currently more unpopular, and rerun the sentence, you may see a hole in your argument.

johnchristopher 11y ago

> Since there is no objective standard of morality, and since "morality" is just a fancy word for "things that people consider good or bad," we probably just have to look out into the world and see whether advertising is against the morals of most. Given that we see little great outrage over the use of advertising, even among those who are aware of its risks, I have to conclude that advertising is morally justifiable. This is a bold statement (italics) and you run into a circular reasoning by the end of that sentence (advertising is morally justifiable because some people are okay with it). May I suggest the following summer read: http://www.amazon.com/Moral-Tribes-Emotion-Reason-Between/dp/0143126059/ref=mt_paperback?_encoding=UTF8&me= http://www.amazon.com/Moral-Tribes-Emotion-Reason-Between/dp... and http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jan/17/moral-tribes-joshua-greene-review http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jan/17/moral-tribes-jo... and then http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115279/joshua-greenes-moral-tribes-reviewed-thomas-nagel http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115279/joshua-greenes-mor...

dredmorbius 11y ago

you could have a system of morality that has the axiom But that's a strawman. It's not the argument being made here. Or by the numerous other critics of advertising: Adam Curtis, Jerry Mander, Neil Postman, etc. The remainder of your arguments follow a similar train.