[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 11 KB, 189x200, Philosopher_R.M._Hare_at_Princeton_in_1957.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23356700 No.23356700 [Reply] [Original]

Has anyone here read Hare or other universal presciptivists?
Or even if not what do you think of it?
I'm usually a devoted Kantian but this seems to be the better theory.

>> No.23357622

nah senpai, go read After Virtue to learn why Neo-Aristotelianism is a much better view than Hare and Kant. If you can't get over your Kantianism, read some Christine Korsgaard or Barbara Herman.

>> No.23357962

>>23357622
I have read After Virtue. It was shit and virtue ethics are retarded.

>> No.23358114

>morality must be le formulated in rules to follow mindlessly
Biggest NPC dog whistle. Only an amoral person needs an algorithmic formulation of ethics. It shows that you are incapable of using your own free will to make individual decisions.

>> No.23358220

>>23357962
>virtue ethics are shit
Elaborate

>> No.23358561

>>23358220
They aren't a measure of morality as virtues can be used for good and bad. Virtue may make us want to behave morally (Kant's view) but to determine what is moral you need logic.

>> No.23358565

>>23358114
Your strawman describes neither Kantianism nor universal prescriptivism so what is your point?

>> No.23358666

>>23357962
You’re retarded.

>> No.23358745

>>23358666
No. Virtue ethics are a joke upheld only by bratty loners without moral responsibility. It's hedonism with more larp.

>> No.23358768

>>23358745
Bratty loners? Is that what I am now Mr. Professor?

>> No.23358777
File: 155 KB, 1242x1394, 1715002786244.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23358777

>>23358745
"Virtue" can literally be translated with "being based". It's not surprising that you got filtered by virtue ethics.

>> No.23358872

>>23358777
Being virtuous and deriving your moral judgements from virtue aren't synonymous.
They are in fact contradictory.
Is rationality a virtue? You are unvirtuous so unbased ergo cringe.

>> No.23358903

>>23358777
The moral value of an action happens in the dialectic process between what we SHOULD do and what we want to do. The virtue ethicist doesn't submit to an external law he acts solely because it is in his character. His actions thus may be in accordance with morality but not moral actions. That's the problem . There is no corrective measure there. In virtue ethics the act is moral if it is based on virtue but multiple contradicting actions can be based on virtue.
A man might deem it loyal and thus virtuous to stay with a cheating wife or he may find it just to divorce a cheating whore. How does he decide between the two? A mere increase in virtue doesn't resolve the conflict.
If he wants to stay with her to get his dick wet he can justify this position and if he wants to leave he can justify this position.
His judgement ultimately is based in his preferences.
yyou can deem this a good thing or even a better thing than to aubmit to moral judgements but you cannot call it a moral decision.