Search results for query: *

Utilitarianism is actually an objective morality system: it doesn't matter who is doing the action, just the result of the action. If Sherlock did the same action Moriarty did, hoping for the best, but the same result happened, that would be a bad act according to Objectivism, just like when...

To clarify, you don't necessarily follow a consequentialist morality (Utilitarianism being a good example), but instead just a moral system through consequentialism? Am I correct in this? I'd also have to ask what are good or bad consequences that you judge a moral system by? Because then it...

See, this is the fuckery of Philosophical definitions. Look up the definition of objective morality. It can be man made or god given (which I think is also man made, tbc). Both are objective. Objective morality is when an action has a definite moral value. Subjective morality is when an action...

You are assuming you can verify assumptions based on conclusions drawn from those assumptions. This is circular reasoning. Let's go through this slowly: Here, you make assumptions so you can 'think rationally', i.e. make conclusions. Here, you use that framework (which has assumptions in it)...

Here you've assumed that you need a god to create morality. Morality can be man made as well. It's important to note that an objective morality, 'the objectively true morality', and Objectivism all use the word 'objective' to mean two wildly different things. An objective morality is one that...