What are the three main areas of moral philosophy? How might answering questions in one area inform the way we think about the other areas?
The three main areas of moral philosophy include value theory, normative ethics, and metaethics. In layman 's terms, these three areas discuss how to improve our individual lives, our moral duties, and the validity of moral claims. Of course, considering one area of moral ethics and formulating an opinion on it will influence the other areas. If one were to decide that the way to obtain a truly good (valuable) life meant achieving happiness in whatever way possible, one might additionally have to debate whether committing unethical actions to achieve that success would be acceptable. If for example, owning an expensive necklace would make one truly happy, then would stealing that necklace be justified, because all that matters in life is pursuing happiness? Or must self-interest be sacrificed sometimes in order to uphold morality? Whichever belief one assumes in either area will affect what’s believed in the other areas.
What is moral skepticism, and what are some reasons that people give for being moral skeptics? Do you think moral skepticism is correct? Why or why not?
With a subject …show more content…
It is possible for an argument to have false premises but have a true conclusion. However, arriving at a true conclusion would come down entirely to luck. The reasoning behind an argument with false premises is not reliable, so the conclusion cannot be guaranteed to be true. An argument with true premises can still have a false conclusion. The argument the author suggests, that heroin is a drug and is illegal to sell and therefore is immoral to use, has a false conclusion. Although the premises are true, they don’t support the conclusion. To have a guaranteed true conclusion, there must be true premises that logically back up the
The three main areas of moral philosophy include value theory, normative ethics, and metaethics. In layman 's terms, these three areas discuss how to improve our individual lives, our moral duties, and the validity of moral claims. Of course, considering one area of moral ethics and formulating an opinion on it will influence the other areas. If one were to decide that the way to obtain a truly good (valuable) life meant achieving happiness in whatever way possible, one might additionally have to debate whether committing unethical actions to achieve that success would be acceptable. If for example, owning an expensive necklace would make one truly happy, then would stealing that necklace be justified, because all that matters in life is pursuing happiness? Or must self-interest be sacrificed sometimes in order to uphold morality? Whichever belief one assumes in either area will affect what’s believed in the other areas.
What is moral skepticism, and what are some reasons that people give for being moral skeptics? Do you think moral skepticism is correct? Why or why not?
With a subject …show more content…
It is possible for an argument to have false premises but have a true conclusion. However, arriving at a true conclusion would come down entirely to luck. The reasoning behind an argument with false premises is not reliable, so the conclusion cannot be guaranteed to be true. An argument with true premises can still have a false conclusion. The argument the author suggests, that heroin is a drug and is illegal to sell and therefore is immoral to use, has a false conclusion. Although the premises are true, they don’t support the conclusion. To have a guaranteed true conclusion, there must be true premises that logically back up the