brockm on Nostr: I'm a moral constructivist. Which is to say, I don't think moral truths exist outside ...
I'm a moral constructivist. Which is to say, I don't think moral truths exist outside of the domain of human experience. In fact, I think most of what we think of as universal moral truths are in-built intuitions we have about how to relate to others. As much as philosophers have tried to construct rational moral frameworks, from virtue ethics to natural rights theories to utilitarianism, the fact remains: humans reason about moral things principally with intuition. I would argue that most of what we're doing is, as David Hume says, applying reason to explain our "passions" in a rational framework.
In this sense, our morality such as it is, is path dependent on our genetics. Most of our moral intuitions emerged because they were evolutionarily selective. Humans don't have claws, fangs, or other biological pre-dispositions to being terribly good predators. Instead, we have the capacity to reason about the past, present and future. Which led us to the ability to make tools, to think about the use of the tools, and to recognize the benefits of social cooperation in making tools and creating sub-specializations in social groups. These behaviors all largely stem from our intuitions that are in-built. And they've served us pretty well, to get us to this level of technological civilization.
So when I suggest that property rights definitely can't be the true basis for ethics in human society, I'm really not standing up for alternate conceptions of natural rights, or a utilitarian argument either! I'm saying all of these claims of objective moral truths seem obviously wrong to me. And i think these moral systems never quite work perfectly when applied, for the very reason that people are not applying logical reasoning to moral reasoning! They're listening to their intuitions about what is wrong and right. Obviously everyone doesn't agree intuitively on what's wrong and right, and that creates conflict and disagreement.
In this sense, our morality such as it is, is path dependent on our genetics. Most of our moral intuitions emerged because they were evolutionarily selective. Humans don't have claws, fangs, or other biological pre-dispositions to being terribly good predators. Instead, we have the capacity to reason about the past, present and future. Which led us to the ability to make tools, to think about the use of the tools, and to recognize the benefits of social cooperation in making tools and creating sub-specializations in social groups. These behaviors all largely stem from our intuitions that are in-built. And they've served us pretty well, to get us to this level of technological civilization.
So when I suggest that property rights definitely can't be the true basis for ethics in human society, I'm really not standing up for alternate conceptions of natural rights, or a utilitarian argument either! I'm saying all of these claims of objective moral truths seem obviously wrong to me. And i think these moral systems never quite work perfectly when applied, for the very reason that people are not applying logical reasoning to moral reasoning! They're listening to their intuitions about what is wrong and right. Obviously everyone doesn't agree intuitively on what's wrong and right, and that creates conflict and disagreement.