I think the distinction comes when I'm deciding what to do. I can know height, temperature, location, healthiness, beauty, etc, of everything and still not know what to do. What I need to know is which action is *morally right*. I may need to know the other things to decide that, but look at a chain of logic leading up to a decision.
If I eat the icecream it will taste good. Tasting good will make me happy. Therefore I should eat the icecream.
Why didn't the chain of logic extend to infinity? Because it stopped at a 'should' statement. Those are the ones I meant to call moral- ones.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-05 04:10 pm (UTC)I think the distinction comes when I'm deciding what to do. I can know height, temperature, location, healthiness, beauty, etc, of everything and still not know what to do. What I need to know is which action is *morally right*. I may need to know the other things to decide that, but look at a chain of logic leading up to a decision.
If I eat the icecream it will taste good.
Tasting good will make me happy.
Therefore I should eat the icecream.
Why didn't the chain of logic extend to infinity? Because it stopped at a 'should' statement. Those are the ones I meant to call moral- ones.