(August 13, 2019 at 5:17 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Lol, and why shouldn’t we hurt people, Acro? Who or what decides these “oughts” that aren’t, according to you, at all related to physical well-being? Is “The Good” concerned with well-being? Yes, or no?
I wonder if any of us can justify these things.
Why shouldn't we hurt people? Because it works against the wellbeing of them and our society.
Why is it bad to work against that wellbeing? Because we want wellbeing.
Why is it good to want wellbeing? Because we just want it.....
If these ethical principles ultimately come down to habit, or preferences, then they may just change. But if we assert that they are true things, then they are true things that can't be proved by science. Some people would call that immaterial and transcendental. Wittgenstein calls it supernatural. It doesn't matter so much about the terminology.
It seems you are arguing that "wellbeing is something we should value" is a true fact (not a preference) that can't be proved by science. So (I haven't read the whole thread carefully), it makes sense to ask you: why is the desirability of wellbeing a fact, and not just a preference? Who or what decides these “oughts”?
