Personal note: I should have trial results by the end of the week, manufacturing started by the end of the month, and an FDA response by the beginning of April, in case you all are wondering. A New Yorker profile of the ethical philosopher Agnes Callard
Interesting perspective. Not disagreeing with it. I just note, what I see as the deeper problem: ethical philosophy is built upon sand.
Unlike physics or chemistry, there are no real objective 'facts' to be had. This is why one simply ignores its conclusions when they seem wrong. One understands the bedrock assumptions themselves are forever up to interpretation, and logically constructed edifices upon such foundations all the more so.
Does this mean if someone is obviously living an exemplary life, with plenty of examples where they deliberately chose to uphold some personal moral code over what was easiest or most convenient, that their views on ethical philosophy are per se more believable?
The making up figures bit is quite quotable, if you ever need to win this debate in the wild.
Interesting perspective. Not disagreeing with it. I just note, what I see as the deeper problem: ethical philosophy is built upon sand.
Unlike physics or chemistry, there are no real objective 'facts' to be had. This is why one simply ignores its conclusions when they seem wrong. One understands the bedrock assumptions themselves are forever up to interpretation, and logically constructed edifices upon such foundations all the more so.
Does this mean if someone is obviously living an exemplary life, with plenty of examples where they deliberately chose to uphold some personal moral code over what was easiest or most convenient, that their views on ethical philosophy are per se more believable?