(September 5, 2012 at 12:33 pm)discordianpope Wrote: 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.
The is-ought is not a distinction, it is a problem for any type of morality. Bridging that gap would be one of the purposes of science of morality. And no one said it had to grounded on biology.
