2,898
edits
Meta-Ethics: Difference between revisions
m
no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
'''While normal ethics addresses such questions as "''What should I do?''", evaluating specific practices and principles of action, meta-ethics addresses questions such as "''What is good?''" and "''How can we tell what is good from what is bad?''".''' At its core meta-ethics addresses the [[relativity of ethics]] (or moral relativism) which is the concept that something that is deemed ''good'' might not be good for everyone i.e. it is simply a matter of contextual [[framing]]. | '''While normal ethics addresses such questions as "''What should I do?''", evaluating specific practices and principles of action, meta-ethics addresses questions such as "''What is good?''" and "''How can we tell what is good from what is bad?''".''' At its core meta-ethics addresses the [[relativity of ethics]] (or moral relativism) which is the concept that something that is deemed ''good'' might not be good for everyone i.e. it is simply a matter of contextual [[framing]]. | ||
As information has become more of a commodity for clicks than proliferated on the merits of its objective truth this Good / Evil dichotomy. With the development of the [[Library of Babel]] (the internet contains sufficient information to equally disprove or support | As information has become more of a commodity for clicks than proliferated on the merits of its objective truth this Good / Evil dichotomy. With the development of the [[Library of Babel]] (the internet contains sufficient information to equally disprove or support any theorem) fact is become increasingly difficult to discern. | ||