Robopop
New member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2010
- Messages
- 692
- MBTI Type
- INTP
- Enneagram
- 5w4
- Instinctual Variant
- sp/sx
The is ought problem was formulated by David Hume, according to this problem, we cannot get what should be, what "ought" to be(in other words, morals and ethics) from what "is", factual knowledge. This possibly means any kind of moral system is completely arbitrary because there is no factual basis for the way one option "ought" to be over any other option. Hume is saying morality and ethics are not propositions, for example, say killing is consider wrong, there's no way that it could be considered true that killing is wrong.
Of course there are objections to Hume's line of reasoning but do you think about this, do you think this philosophical problem can ever be solved, is moral nihilism the answer or can other meta-ethical ideas be preserved?
Of course there are objections to Hume's line of reasoning but do you think about this, do you think this philosophical problem can ever be solved, is moral nihilism the answer or can other meta-ethical ideas be preserved?