Comment on Philosophy meme

Znarf176@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

• trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Next step is acknowledging that data is also very infallible and not objective.

  source

  • TheSambassador@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    It’s not that data is subjective, it’s that the interpretation of that data can be subjective, and the raw data can be misleading.

    source
  • Cryophilia@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Fallible

    source
• poplargrove@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  If the standard you use isnt true (or is relative), no matter how well you use it in figuring out what to do, all your moral judgements will be wrong (or just relative)

  My point being it has “objective” in there but not in the way that matters.

  source

  • ryathal@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Every standard is wrong or limited in ways, it doesn’t make them useless. Utilitarian views can be useful, but it’s also easy to argue that euthanasia for the handicapped is moral from a Utilitarian perspective.

    source

    • poplargrove@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Sure but what Matt is suggesting would mean we can hold something completely wrong or even absurd as a moral framework but just so long as we use it consistently.

      source

      • ryathal@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        You can. The absurdity is based on your inherent bias, the concept of absurdity is arbitrary.

        source