RE: Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position
March 9, 2020 at 3:12 pm
(This post was last modified: March 9, 2020 at 3:20 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
That's the hope, that our empathy can function as a sort of warning system. It's not certain (and almost certainly untrue) that moral content is what empathy as an evolved trait is adapted to recognize, though.
In the way that realists have it figured, empathy compels us to action through a manufactured emotional attachment, but isn't the bad-making property or even a valid method of moral assessment. It's a nifty trick that biology has come up with to broaden the umbrella of self interest to those nearest to us. Very useful for a social species, as you noted.
It might not actually be more complex than that - things being good or bad, despite all of our protestations to the contrary, may actually be based on some subjective fact - like the presence of empathy in a viewer. That's a valid position. Depending on how you view or handle that empathy it would be a non cognitivist or subjectivist view.
Regardless, our empathy is a useful tool in the moral field..and an empathetic person who doesn't have much of a desire to do bad is probably going to manage their entire life as a moral agent without ever being aware of any of these terms or distinctions or similarities between moral propositions. They will not need to make up their minds or take any particular stand on any moral system. Between not wanting to skullfuck their neighbors' kid and being capable of imagining that from their neighbors, and their neighbors kids pov....it's a no-go no matter what the bad making properties are..assuming there are bad-making properties..or properties..at all.
In the way that realists have it figured, empathy compels us to action through a manufactured emotional attachment, but isn't the bad-making property or even a valid method of moral assessment. It's a nifty trick that biology has come up with to broaden the umbrella of self interest to those nearest to us. Very useful for a social species, as you noted.
It might not actually be more complex than that - things being good or bad, despite all of our protestations to the contrary, may actually be based on some subjective fact - like the presence of empathy in a viewer. That's a valid position. Depending on how you view or handle that empathy it would be a non cognitivist or subjectivist view.
Regardless, our empathy is a useful tool in the moral field..and an empathetic person who doesn't have much of a desire to do bad is probably going to manage their entire life as a moral agent without ever being aware of any of these terms or distinctions or similarities between moral propositions. They will not need to make up their minds or take any particular stand on any moral system. Between not wanting to skullfuck their neighbors' kid and being capable of imagining that from their neighbors, and their neighbors kids pov....it's a no-go no matter what the bad making properties are..assuming there are bad-making properties..or properties..at all.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
