/lit/ - Literature

>>5559836
Because I don't know what that means.

>Not realizing that ethics are arbitrary and therefore the only answers are nihilism and existentialism

>>5559845
>posting on 4chan from prison

⇒why you're not a virtue ethicist?

Because I'm a nihilist and nihilism is the only tenable stance. Virtues are nothing more than subjective preferences.

>>5559836
I'm a Spinozist, who is the true heir to Aristotelian Virtue Ethics, the superior normative ethics position.

>>5559855
What is your argument for nihilism then?

How does anything exist at all if there is no objective reality?

>>5559904
⇒What is your argument for nihilism then?
Nihilism is self-evident and self-explanatory. Ethical claims are nothing more than expressions of emotional preference.

⇒How does anything exist at all if there is no objective reality?
What does this have to do with moral nihilism, you fuckwit?

>>5559914
>Ethical claims are nothing more than expressions of emotional preference.

Where does that emotional preference come from, is it not natural? If it is, one could argue that people have an innate sense between what is right and wrong, and then suddenly you have non-nihilism and naturalism.

>>5559854
>Not knowing what existentialism is
>Not realizing that normal people don't have to follow arbitrary ethical rules and possess empathy

>>5559928
⇒Where does that emotional preference come from, is it not natural?
Of course it is natural. What else do you think it is? Are you a metaphysical dualist spiritualist supernatural magic pseudo-science crackpot from /x/? Emotions products of the brain. Seriously, go watch a talk by Sam Harris on youtube.

⇒If it is, one could argue that people have an innate sense between what is right and wrong
If that were true, then we wouldn't need morality or laws because people would automatically behave "correctly".

>>5559940
>Sam Harris
Or you could read something of value on the subject, like hume.

>>5559940
>people would automatically behave "correctly"
Unless we say that everyone knows what is right and wrong, and they act wrong out of fear/anger.

>>5559940
Not that anon, but what's your argument against existentialism?

>>5559940
The emotions we experience cannot be objectively measured or observed. They are not part of physical reality. The brain on the other hand is a physical organ and all its products remain physical.

Stoicism mustard race

>>5559843
>>5559836
Same, someone want to tell me what it means?

>>5559914
>⇒How does anything exist at all if there is no objective reality?
>What does this have to do with moral nihilism, you fuckwit?
why did this make me cackle

>>5560122
A virtue is a trait or skill which is considered morally good. For example it would be a virtue to google the definition of virtue instead of asking /lit/ to spoonfeed you.

>>5560129
I know what virtue means you drongo, what is virtue ethics and how do we decide on the way to act?

>Suppose it is obvious that someone in need should be helped. A utilitarian will point to the fact that the consequences of doing so will maximize well-being, a deontologist to the fact that, in doing so the agent will be acting in accordance with a moral rule such as “Do unto others as you would be done by” and a virtue ethicist to the fact that helping the person would be charitable or benevolent.

Basically just do what you think a good person would do? Is that not what everyone already does, and the extreme cases of ambiguity are what motivates us to look for more concrete guidelines on being ethical.

>>5559836
Because consequentialism is more consistent and better satisfies my moral intuitions?