[ 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: 91 KB, 825x1000, Hume.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16337935 No.16337935 [Reply] [Original]

How do you deal with people that, when arguing for what would be better in society, just continually employ the is/ought dichotomy? What about when they give examples of other cultures or peoples who used different moral standards than our own?

>> No.16337943

yell out 'muh relativism' in a whiny and loud voice until they shut up

>> No.16337946

You explain the is/ought dichotomy to them
Alternatively, take a Kantian-Dialectic route and make them reject their own examples

>> No.16337983

>>16337946
>You explain the is/ought dichotomy to them
The is/ought dichotomy states that "There 'is' nothing in the world which tells us how it 'ought' to be" correct? If so, what would technically be wrong with someone saying "your moral decision isn't correct because anything morality 'y' you extrapolate from 'x' experience is a result of your own opinion."? For example, saying someone shouldn't kill except in self defense, then another responding that this doesn't genuinely logically follow from anything due to the is/ought dichotomy.