(September 5, 2012 at 11:52 am)genkaus Wrote:(September 5, 2012 at 11:45 am)discordianpope Wrote: What's wrong with 6 and 7? They seem to be obviously true to me.
Most of humanity believes in objective morality because of their theism. So, even if they are wrong, they know why.
Why wouldn't we be able to find a scientific basis for morality? Proponents of science of morality would surely disagree.
Oh, my bad, maybe you are right about the theism thing. I thought you were saying that it is not the case that most people believe in objective morality.
The problem with the whole science of morality thing is that it's, well, pretty much bullshit. It just ignores the whole is/ought distinction. To ground morality in biology you need a re-teleologised aristotelian biology. Something nobody wants. Facts about what is going on in our brains tell us nothing about what ought to be going on in our brains unless we already have an idea of what ought to be going on in our brains.
