The bare bones: five key arguments in the form of three-line syllogisms

This distillation is intended for philosophers in a hurry who are too impatient to read the rest, or those who want it all in a nutshell for some other reason. If you need any of it explaining further (or don't know what a syllogism is), please turn to the eight claims given on the home page instead.

 

Syllogism 1: Rejection of metaphysics

All experience is a matter of degree.

Metaphysics is not a matter of degree.

Therefore, metaphysics is irrelevant to experience. 

 

Syllogism 2: Rejection of positive or negative metaphysical claims about ethics

All value is found in experience.

Metaphysical value is not found in experience.

Therefore, value judgements have no metaphysical justification

 

(This argument undermines the many common approaches to ethics described as "eternalist" or "nihilist" in the thesis)

 

Syllogism 3: Argument for incremental morality

Value is found in experience.

Experience is a matter of degree.

Therefore, value is a matter of degree.

 

Syllogism 4: Argument for moral objectivity (based on syllogism 3)

Value is a matter of degree.

Things that are a matter of degree can be interpreted positively or negatively (e.g. half-full vs half-empty glass).

Therefore, a positive interpretation of the incrementality of value is possible.

(Also, a negative interpretation is not necessarily correct)

 

(This argument undermines the negative interpretation of relativity often assumed in postmodernist thought)

 

Syllogism 5: Argument for the dependency of scientific objectivity on moral objectivity

Facts are never experienced in isolation from values.

Both facts and values can only be justified through experience.

Therefore, facts cannot be justified prior to values.

 

(This argument undermines the assumptions about ethics made in nearly all analytic philosophy: see thesis 4d)

 

Return to moralobjectivity.net home page