|
You mention deontology, roachboy, but oddly enough when I hear the phrase "Science of Morality" I think of Spinoza first. I suspect it's because modern deonotologists seem to have largely given up on the project of deriving an ethical system the way Kant tried. In general, philosophical programs of ethics are always suspect to me, regardless of their origin, because they all take pains to reach the same results. They're not falsifiable, or to the extent they are, they're indistinguishable except in how they describe ethics. I find, in my own ethical life, that I use whatever seems to be the best way of thinking about a specific problem. Sometimes it's deontology, sometimes it's consequentialism, and sometimes it's virtue ethics. Maybe Moore was right, that 'goodness' is simply an irreducible property of reality that we just 'see'. Though I'm sure you know the problems with that.
__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."
"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."
-- Friedrich Nietzsche
|