Page 3 of 3
Re: hybridizing ethics and possible conclusions.
Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 8:06 am
by Metacrock
Kane Augustus wrote:Metacrock wrote:Tell me why we should consider her as a serious philosopher? The notion of making selfishness into virtue is contradictory to the concept of ethics. It's wrong on the face of it.
I will not tell you or anyone else what to think. Consider Rand how you will. I can suggest to you, however, that if you're really not that familiar with her thinking, then reading
Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology will set you on a path to better understanding of her thoughts.
Selfishness is not an ethical concept. To be concerned about one's interests is not a moral platform. We are all selfish, and insomuch as we tend to the pursuit of our lives and happiness we are selfish; i.e., we regard our
selves as having meaning and being worth preservation and happiness. If you want to understand more about this, read
The Virtue of Selfishness. Don't be mislead by the title: it is explained within the book itself.
I don't mean to offend you man. I don't think any less of you regardless of what I think of Rand. I do admit I have read much of her. I will read those sources. Thanks.
Re: hybridizing ethics and possible conclusions.
Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 12:31 pm
by Kane Augustus
Metacrock wrote:I don't mean to offend you man. I don't think any less of you regardless of what I think of Rand. I do admit I have read much of her. I will read those sources. Thanks.
I'm not offended. Not at all. But thank you for your concern. I've just been making a lot of changes in my personal life, and one of those changes is to not tell people what to think. If people are interested in what I've written or said, they will think about it on their own and because they want to. Thus the reason for the change in my writing style.
I think if you give Rand a chance, you'll notice she's not the calloused psychopath popular media made her out to be. She's challenging, absolutely, but only because she cuts against convention with a very effective blade.
Re: hybridizing ethics and possible conclusions.
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 7:13 am
by mdsimpson92
I will be sure to keep that in mind. I have an article from her somewhere so I will start with that.
That being said, any other hybrids come to mind? Again the one I haven't seen brought up is virtue mixed with utilitarianism. Do either of you know any examples of that?
Re: hybridizing ethics and possible conclusions.
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 3:59 pm
by mdsimpson92
Are we dropping this thread? If so thats fine.
Re: hybridizing ethics and possible conclusions.
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 12:34 pm
by Kane Augustus
I have nothing else to add, overall. I mean, one could combine Fletcher's situationalism with either of the two major historical schools of ethics. But I think we know that circumstance often drives differing decisions regardless of preformed conclusions on which 'system' of ethics one feels beholden to, or prefers.
Re: hybridizing ethics and possible conclusions.
Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 1:46 am
by mdsimpson92
Kane Augustus wrote:I have nothing else to add, overall. I mean, one could combine Fletcher's situationalism with either of the two major historical schools of ethics. But I think we know that circumstance often drives differing decisions regardless of preformed conclusions on which 'system' of ethics one feels beholden to, or prefers.
Fair enough, given the fact that much of what we make of our systems are based largely on personal intuitions.