Andrew M

I think it's raining outside, but I'll go and check to make sure. I checked and, yes, it is. How much did my thought weigh? On your view, is that a me...

Take a look at the twin paradox thought experiment. To magnify the example, in principle, a twin could depart in a spaceship, travel at close to the s...

Yes, but the materialist is simply including the characteristics of substances (i.e., their form) in his definition of matter. It's only a semantic di...

The difference between the modern view and Aristotle's view is that in the modern view, matter implicitly subsumes form (which is what talk of structu...

The matter is only distinguished by its specific form in a substance. For example, a house can materially be made of either brick or wood (or both). B...

A way to think of it is that we don't perceive form or matter (edit: as independent things), we perceive substances (like apples, people, etc.) Those ...

Perhaps of interest, John Wheeler's pithy summary of GR was "Spacetime tells matter how to move; matter tells spacetime how to curve."

Agreed. And to extend the idea further, suppose the robots take over, suitably programmed with Asimov's three laws. What nudges them back in the right...

I meant care in the sense of, "The provision of what is necessary for the health, welfare, maintenance, and protection of someone or something." (OED)...

Of course it is relevant. Without feeling a certain way, some humans might no longer care for their children. But it is the caring for their children ...

So it does. Nonetheless morality is an abstraction over actions just as truth is an abstraction over speech acts. Whereas I consider the consequences ...

No, I'm saying "right/wrong" is like "true/false". The former relates to actions generally, the latter to speech acts. Joe murdering Bill is wrong. An...

The reason Bob would drink the water and not the poison is because he has a physiological need for water. It would not normally even cross one's mind ...

OK, thanks!

Not for a long time, but I'm happy to be convinced to take another look. Do you think the crime of the century (a robbery, say) would count as having ...

I notice that she incorporates Aristotle and eudaimonism in her work. So it seems we are in the same ball park. And similarly for a runner who cheats ...

So an empirical model (in my view) should not only be predictive, but also explanatory. If Bob drinks the water then, on the model's premise that life...

Yes. And even if they do not naturally feel that value (such as with sociopaths and psychopaths) we still expect them to learn and act on that value. ...

The full argument may not be there yet. But I think we should be able to say that the good has something to do with (sentient) life and well-being. A ...

Morality is an abstraction (or pattern or form), not a concrete particular like the above things. However it is an abstraction over particulars and na...

As the above attests to, Kant carved up the world very differently to Aristotle. For Aristotle, eudaimonia is a state of well-being only achieved by p...

The evidence of those implicit values is that a model assuming them makes successful predictions (and, in addition, is explanatory). Suppose that Bob ...

Yes, I'm also saying that the (implicit) values of life and well-being are part of the natural function of being human.

Make it valuable for a human being, if that helps. I'm talking about what is valuable for human beings independently of personal opinions or preferenc...

Yes. And what is valuable to a human being is life and well-being, not death and suffering.

Yes. So?

Your question makes no sense. We need food and water to survive. We don't need to not survive.

Can you elaborate? I strongly disagree. One's moral judgments are informed by the rational understanding that everyone's life and well-being are essen...

As I've already pointed out, food and water are valuable for human beings regardless of what anyone thinks about it. You can lead a horse to water, bu...

For why I think it's natural, see my earlier comment on natural focal points here. The diamond ring example was just to show that there can be a disti...

I think eudaimonia, per Aristotle. That is the universal standard by which we can evaluate the actions of ourselves and others in everyday life, as we...

From an evolutionary perspective, we want food and water because we need them to survive. We don't need them because we want them. As a human being yo...

Great example. The Will to Power is to morality as a counterfeit coin is to the real thing. The counterfeiter may do quite well for a time (perhaps ev...

I agree, but I think that conditional is simply "If life has value then ..." in an ordinary sense. If so, then that value constitutes a universal stan...

No, it's a natural and pragmatic standard. It's hard to get much useful work done when people keep randomly dropping in to pop you off and take your s...

It's true that people can choose to value different things. But suppose one values murder and theft. Consistently acting on those values erodes or des...

You just have to look at what the basic needs of human beings are. For example, food and water are universally valuable for human beings. Or do you th...

Yes, so Lady Jane can think Tom is immoral to not slow down because she does not have all the relevant facts available. So that would be similar to co...

It's not so clear to me. :-) Naturally both Lady Jane and Tom want to avoid bad consequences, particularly to themselves and whoever is included in th...

Perhaps this is a difference between "in principle" and "in practice". Certainly a mountain of diamonds on a planet in another galaxy has no practical...

Nice post and I think we essentially agree. I would just add that I don't think the good is a brute fact - we can seek a deeper explanation of those g...

Fair enough. The standard is implicit in the action, since the action is done by a human being (for whom the standard applies). It seems a logically c...

I don't follow your point. Joe acted. He is a human being. So Joe's action can be measured against the value standard applicable to human beings. Whet...

No. It is something more like the basic physiological and psychological needs of human beings.

Monetary. Alice values the ring at a few dollars but it is worth thousands. The example shows that the perceived value and the actual value can be dif...

Right. So the issue is that we can fail to value what is valuable. For example, Alice owns a diamond ring but thinks it is cubic zirconia. Similarly i...

I pointed to it in your hypothetical when I said that Joe's action was wrong. We evaluate the hypothetical from our personal perspective. If you value...

As I've already discussed, the action itself is wrong. Whereas you seem to think that right and wrong are in the mind. Is that right?

No, it is not.

Yes. What Joe did was wrong. That seems like a perfectly ordinary and meaningful sentence to me. It is his action that we are condemning. From the Oxf...