(March 2, 2022 at 10:34 am)polymath257 Wrote: In math, if two people disagree, they try to find a proof one way or the other. There are established axioms and rules of deduction and those determine the correctness of any proposed proof. if the two people do not share an axiom system, the question is considered to be meaningless. if there is a proof of two contradictory statements, then the axiom system is declared to be deficient.
I think I understand where you coming from with this. It's true that there tends to be a widespread agreement on the axioms that have been established in mathematics whereas it's hard to find something equivalent to this in ethics.
Nevertheless there is something intuitive about the statement that chopping off anyone's arms for fun is wrong, even in the absence of knowing what exactly makes it wrong. It doesn't seem to be just an opinion.
