For many years, philosophers have tried to understand the role of ethics and morals in society whether or not morals are actually there or not. While others argue that it is already there and people just have to discover it, others state that morals are just made up by society. Such a philosophy that supports the former is known as the Boydian philosophy.
The person behind this philosophical body of thought is the philosopher Richard Boyd. Boyd is an avid believer in the existence of scientific realism. He is also a believer of moral realism because he believes that the two are actually very similar in the way that they are treated by people and how they are found to be true.
Boyd follows the logic that if scientific realism is probably true, then moral realism must also probably be true too. So with that statement, Boyd actually concludes that moral realism is probably true. He bases this on the analogy that they are very similar in context.
To further illustrate, take a look at the atom, which is the basic building block of everything in the world. The atom, when theorized of its existence, could not be seen by the naked eye nor could it be felt using the other 4 senses as well even though scientists believed they exist. Years down the road, scientists created a special microscope for seeing atoms and were able to see them.
While Boyd does not really aim to trump anti moral realists, his claim is that there is definitely evidence of the existence of moral realism. He questions what moral realism evidence would look or feel like if morality could somehow be discovered and observed through the naked eye. His claim is to be open minded moral realists that should see how moral realism could prove to be a positive argument.
Now, according to the theory and experiment based approach of the scientific method, a scientific concept is first created with a hypothesis then a theory. The next step is to create experiments and try to gather as much evidence there is to try and prove the theory correct. If the theory has been proven to be correct, then it will evidently become a truth.
In some way, moral realism is the same because the presence of morality has helped shape society to what it is. There may or may not be proof that such moral entities exist but morality, nevertheless, is there and has been evidently at work with people. That is why the argument here is that people, when they are born, will be delved into a world of morals where they will experience these morals and use them for everyday life. The only thing left to do is try to see how to measure and observe the activity of morals.
With that said, Boydian principles suggest that an open mind is needed to view morality in such a light. Relating it to scientific entities, moral entities may work the same way as well. So if scientific entities are just waiting to be discovered but are already there, then moral entities are also waiting to be discovered too, if they do exist.
The person behind this philosophical body of thought is the philosopher Richard Boyd. Boyd is an avid believer in the existence of scientific realism. He is also a believer of moral realism because he believes that the two are actually very similar in the way that they are treated by people and how they are found to be true.
Boyd follows the logic that if scientific realism is probably true, then moral realism must also probably be true too. So with that statement, Boyd actually concludes that moral realism is probably true. He bases this on the analogy that they are very similar in context.
To further illustrate, take a look at the atom, which is the basic building block of everything in the world. The atom, when theorized of its existence, could not be seen by the naked eye nor could it be felt using the other 4 senses as well even though scientists believed they exist. Years down the road, scientists created a special microscope for seeing atoms and were able to see them.
While Boyd does not really aim to trump anti moral realists, his claim is that there is definitely evidence of the existence of moral realism. He questions what moral realism evidence would look or feel like if morality could somehow be discovered and observed through the naked eye. His claim is to be open minded moral realists that should see how moral realism could prove to be a positive argument.
Now, according to the theory and experiment based approach of the scientific method, a scientific concept is first created with a hypothesis then a theory. The next step is to create experiments and try to gather as much evidence there is to try and prove the theory correct. If the theory has been proven to be correct, then it will evidently become a truth.
In some way, moral realism is the same because the presence of morality has helped shape society to what it is. There may or may not be proof that such moral entities exist but morality, nevertheless, is there and has been evidently at work with people. That is why the argument here is that people, when they are born, will be delved into a world of morals where they will experience these morals and use them for everyday life. The only thing left to do is try to see how to measure and observe the activity of morals.
With that said, Boydian principles suggest that an open mind is needed to view morality in such a light. Relating it to scientific entities, moral entities may work the same way as well. So if scientific entities are just waiting to be discovered but are already there, then moral entities are also waiting to be discovered too, if they do exist.
About the Author:
If you are looking for information about Boydian philosophy, come to our web pages today. More details are available at http://www.genwars-fmfm1.com now.