The Definition of Morality - Part 1 of 5

Stephen Stich takes us on a journey through recent moral philosophy, meta-ethics, numerous studies in moral psychology, a discussion of the moral/conventional task, and some interesting moral dilemmas, in an attempt to define morality.
Lots of interesting things to consider.


Stich is primarily known in philosophy for his work in the philosophy of mind, cognitive science, epistemology, and moral psychology. In philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Stich (1983) has argued for a form of eliminative materialism—the view that talk of the mental should be replaced with talk of its physical substrate. Since then, however, he has changed some of his views on the mind. See Deconstructing the Mind (1996) for his more recent views. In epistemology, he has explored (with several of his colleagues) the nature of intuitions using the techniques of experimental philosophy, especially epistemic intuitions that vary among cultures. This work reflects a general skepticism about conceptual analysis and the traditional methods of analytic philosophy. In The Fragmentation of Reason he briefly sketched a form of epistemic relativism "in the spirit of pragmatism."

http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~stich/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Stich

http://www.semionet.com/FR/default.htm

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Stephen
• Stich
• morality
• ethics
• psychology
• philosophy
• moral
• conventional
• task
• Alasdair
• MacIntyre
• Paul
• Taylor
• Bernard
• Gert
• Richard
• Joyce
• Elliot
• Turiel
• Jonathan
• Haidt
• James
• Blair
• Williams
• relativism

[drsuessre14]

Thanks for posting this! I'm always excited when someone posts something from contemporary philosophers that may not have so much of a popular name but are still very well known within their own discipline.

[riversonthemoon]

I'm glad you liked it. Are you familiar with Stephen Stich's work? Any recommendations? I haven't read any of his books yet, but I will look for one when I head back to Australia this Friday.

I have one more lecture of his that I will post in the near future. Keep an eye out for it.

:-)

[entropia34332]

Thaks !

But:

I think this guy should just stick with writing books .... his voice sounds that of a like a donkey in agony ... it's so anarchic and strident that it diverts the attention from the message.

[riversonthemoon]

"his voice sounds that of a like a donkey in agony"

LOL

His voice is a little hard to listen to sometimes. But he does present some interesting studies.

[floydstinkyboy]

you dig up the best stuff mr moon.

[riversonthemoon]

Thanks! You're always the first to see it.

The other parts are uploading now. I'll be posting more stuff from this guy in the coming weeks. Some interesting food for thought.

[PBsussex]

this guy needs to get back to sesame street where he belongs, big bird will be getting lonely

[pbatusa]

Does Morality have a standard of reference? Because: that is the root of morality.. for example: 5 + 1 = (whatever the standard of reference is) which defines what "5" is and what "1" is .... so the answer would be "vapor" if Zero was denied.... for without "zero" we can't even define a negative number ... I use God's Law from the Holy Bible to define morality .. in essence .. the Creator of man.. seems a good place to start.. an unknown philosopher .. angrydude net

[SirWinstonChurchill]

@riversonthemoon

Morality and any associated ideal is rooted entirely in a presupposition some higher power defines what is correct for human behavior.

Any atheist who claims I am immoral is no different than a boxwood pastor saying I am a "sinner."

[Kenzofeis]

There is no point in "defining" moral as some "code" because it is always manipulative and individual; it stems from ego. Thus, some seek to others with a common platform - but only as long as it serves self to "borrow some power" from a peer network. Again, the ego.

Moral is used to try to come across as "better" and/ or to control others, or to try and "secure" ones surroundings.. Manipulative, selfish, volatile.

[TOMsReason]

What is morality, or ethics? It is a code of values to guide mans choices and actions—the choices and actions that determine the purpose and the course of his life. Ethics, as a science, deals with discovering and defining such a code.

The first question that has to be answered, as a precondition of any attempt to define, to judge or to accept any specific system of ethics, is: Why does man need a code of values? ...

Does man need values at all—and why?

Ayn Rand

[drsuessre14]

No, I haven't. But I've heard him mentioned several times in other works I've read. I can't think of one specifically right now, but, if I come across one, I'll try and remember to mention or keep it (better) in mind.