Re: Man ethicizes

Geoffrey Allan Plauché — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 03:42:33 GMT

kaxahdan:
I wonder what you guys would have say to this: Since man acts and that man is the only being with ethics, I was thinking we probably could derive it as a sub-category of action that man ethicizes/moralizes. It might or might not make it any easier to arrive at ethical propositions, I was thinking that probaly it may somehow help us bridge the Humean gulf between the is and ought statements.

This has already been done and is being done in the burgeoning tradition of Aristotelian liberalism/libertarianism.

Check out my post in another thread.

Also, check out Roderick Long's book draft "Wittgenstein, Austrian Economics, and the Logic of Action," especially chapter 10.

Man ethicizes

kaxahdan — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 02:58:16 GMT

I wonder what you guys would have say to this: Since man acts and that man is the only being with ethics, I was thinking we probably could derive it as a sub-category of action that man ethicizes/moralizes. It might or might not make it any easier to arrive at ethical propositions, I was thinking that probaly it may somehow help us bridge the Humean gulf between the is and ought statements.

Political Theory

Re: Man ethicizes

Man ethicizes