(March 11, 2015 at 12:25 pm)rasetsu Wrote: See, I don't agree with that. What we value doesn't determine what is ethically significant. We try to reason backward from what we value to what we find ethical because that seems the appropriate way to justify ethical norms. But that always leaves a gap; yes it's valuable, but is the good also morally good? I think in reality, ethical norms are just picked up along the way, subconsciously, without our conscious choosing of them (e.g. fairness as a value seems built-in to us; we don't 'choose' it). From what I understand of the various moral anti-realisms, I'd have to say that I'm a non-cognitivist, or maybe a presupposition failure type error theorist.
I don't see how what we value could not determine our ethics. Doesn't determining ethics require making value judgements?
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell