Science of morality
The science of morality may refer to various forms of ethical naturalism grounding morality in rational, empirical consideration of the natural world.[1]
Overview[edit]
Moral science may refer to the consideration of what is best for, and how to maximize the flourishing of, either particular individuals[2] or all conscious creatures.[3][4] It has been proposed that "morality" can be appropriately defined on the basis of fundamental premises necessary for any empirical, secular, and philosophical discussion and that societies can use the methods of science to provide answers to moral questions.[5]
The norms advocated by moral scientists (e.g. rights to abortion, euthanasia, and drug liberalizationunder certain circumstances) …show more content…
She proposed that science analyze: (a) existing social norms and their history, (b) the psychology of morality, and the way that individuals interact with moral matters and prescriptions, and (c) the sociology of morality.[11]
Popular literature[edit]
The theory and methods of a normative science of morality are explicitly discussed in Joseph Daleiden's The Science of Morality: The Individual, Community, and Future Generations (1998). Daleiden's book, in contrast to Harris, extensively discusses the relevant philosophical literature. InThe Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values, Sam Harris's goal is to show how moral truth can be backed by "science", or more specifically, empirical knowledge, critical thinking, philosophy, but most controversially, the scientific method.
Patricia Churchland offers that, accepting Hume's is-ought problem, the use of induction from premises and definitions remains a valid way of reasoning in life and science.[10]
Scientific …show more content…
This is so, even if libertarian free will is false. This is because punishment can still serve its purposes: it deters others from committing their own crimes, educates and reminds everyone about what the society stands for, incapacitates the criminal from doing more harm, goes some way to relieving or repaying the victim, and corrects the criminal (also see recidivism). This author argues that, at least, any prison system should be pursuing those goals, and that it is an empirical question as to what sorts of punishment realize these goals most effectively, and how well various prison systems actually serve these
The science of morality may refer to various forms of ethical naturalism grounding morality in rational, empirical consideration of the natural world.[1]
Overview[edit]
Moral science may refer to the consideration of what is best for, and how to maximize the flourishing of, either particular individuals[2] or all conscious creatures.[3][4] It has been proposed that "morality" can be appropriately defined on the basis of fundamental premises necessary for any empirical, secular, and philosophical discussion and that societies can use the methods of science to provide answers to moral questions.[5]
The norms advocated by moral scientists (e.g. rights to abortion, euthanasia, and drug liberalizationunder certain circumstances) …show more content…
She proposed that science analyze: (a) existing social norms and their history, (b) the psychology of morality, and the way that individuals interact with moral matters and prescriptions, and (c) the sociology of morality.[11]
Popular literature[edit]
The theory and methods of a normative science of morality are explicitly discussed in Joseph Daleiden's The Science of Morality: The Individual, Community, and Future Generations (1998). Daleiden's book, in contrast to Harris, extensively discusses the relevant philosophical literature. InThe Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values, Sam Harris's goal is to show how moral truth can be backed by "science", or more specifically, empirical knowledge, critical thinking, philosophy, but most controversially, the scientific method.
Patricia Churchland offers that, accepting Hume's is-ought problem, the use of induction from premises and definitions remains a valid way of reasoning in life and science.[10]
Scientific …show more content…
This is so, even if libertarian free will is false. This is because punishment can still serve its purposes: it deters others from committing their own crimes, educates and reminds everyone about what the society stands for, incapacitates the criminal from doing more harm, goes some way to relieving or repaying the victim, and corrects the criminal (also see recidivism). This author argues that, at least, any prison system should be pursuing those goals, and that it is an empirical question as to what sorts of punishment realize these goals most effectively, and how well various prison systems actually serve these