On Moral Authorities

[robvalue]

Sorry if I misunderstood. Are you saying human happiness is just one proposed goal then? [1]

I agree it is a good goal, but it is incredibly vague and qualifying it is very hard. I don't think it can be objectified in any way. [2]

1) No worries. I just appreciate your willingness to seek common understanding! I am saying that human happiness (understood in the classical sense of human fullness/perfection/fulfillment) IS the universal goal of every human. It is what we are all trying to achieve, according to how we subjectively understand it. In other words, whatever any individual's goal turns out to be, it is THEIR interpretation of human fullness. It is the most abstract and general "end" for which all human actions are done. Think less "pleasure" and more "the meaning of life".

You're welcome

Well, in my case, the happiness of animals is very important to me too. I try and place it as high on my agenda as I can. You could say that the reason I care about animals being happy is because that makes me happy. This is ultimately true. When you boil down morality, it comes down to emotions. It is about what you want to be the case. Without emotions or desires, morality makes no sense. A neutral, uncaring observer will have no opinion. This is all a tautology really; it's modelling morality rather than seeking to guide or measure it. My idea of human happiness might be so warped that anyone else would consider what I want to be horrific.

2) This is EXACTLY the point. Happiness IS living a full human life WELL. What does that mean? The answer is not easy nor perfectly clear. Arriving at a universal answer and full account of this object may even be impossible. Does this mean any discussion is pointless or that nothing at all can be ascertained about the objective reality? I don't think so. Something tells me that, merely by sharing a common humanity, we would agree on some simple and fundamental aspects of the object (and therefore, will have begun to objectify it).

Absolutely, yes. I agree living life well is important. You could in theory objectify it, but it would simply be one person's version of what it means to live life well. It's not like measurements where it's of practical use for us to all agree on a certain system.

Discussion is absolutely crucial, yes, for exactly this reason. If I/we consider a moral position to be superior, it's vitally important that every effort is made to try and explain to others why that is. It's in this way that "progress" is made, and eventually societal norms are altered. What is absolutely useless is to simply announce that one moral system is better than another. This achieves nothing except a feeling of self righteousness.

So indeed yes, discussing the very basics of what we are trying to achieve is incredibly important, to find as much common ground as possible.