Morals & Ethics, Nature of Actions

I think it's time that you read more of Kant than just a couple of sections from the Grundlegung in order to get a fuller picture of his philosophy of morality.

Just to clarify: do you believe that there is anything which may be called "morality?"

djbt wrote:

You seem to be saying that moral law has necessary existence, and working from that. If that is not what you are saying I cannot see how you can approached this deductively. If you are saying this, then please explain to me why you think moral law necessarily exists.

Because morality cannot be founded on any other basis.

No, it doesn't seem that there is, if I am interpreting your use of the word 'morality' correctly. If you mean do people have sets of beliefs they call 'morality' that clearly it does exist, on a similar level to custom, tradition, religion, political persuasion, etc.

But to answer your question honestly, I don't believe in an intuitive, universal, morality discoverable by reason, or by anything else.

It is in response to this that I raise my entertaining/irritating/superfluous Star Wars analogue, which I stand by. See the similarity:
(1) Moral law necessarily exists because morality cannot be founded on any other basis.
(2) Force law necessarily exists because use of the force cannot be founded on any other basis.
To which, I guess, you would reply, that morality exists while use of the force doesn't, to which I would reply, prove that morality exists.

....................
My point is that moral laws exist, if they exist at all, as universal laws. If, on the other hand, they don't exist, then I don't see any reason to talk about them.

My point is that moral laws exist, if they exist at all, as universal laws. If, on the other hand, they don't exist, then I don't see any reason to talk about them.

Moral 'laws' aside; there is no such thing as "Universal Laws"; 'law' implies an 'official source', where there is none.
for example the 'laws' of physics, are not 'laws' they are merely a description of how things are, how things act, under specific circumstances, in a reliable manner.
The term 'law' is a misnomer. Red is red; it is not a law, it just 'is'!

Similarly there are no 'moral laws' there is only a complicated network of results, effects, and feedbacks from every human choice; and taking these into account prior to acting in a manner that may be construed as 'immoral' only makes sense.

Beyond that there is our personal assessment of how chance effects the universe, especially the minute portion of it in which we reside, and our lives are nothing, if they do not serve to refine a sense of the 'ideal' way to interact with those chance events.

[and by the way Joe, what does "These are the saddest of possible words: "Tinker to Evers to Chance." -- Franklin P. Adams, 1910" mean?]

Well... where can we go from here? Apart from morality not existing making discussion of morality fairly pointless, do you have any other reasons for believing that morality exists, or at least working under the assumption that it does? (I had high hopes that you would convince me to abandon the position that moral law does not exist, but rather you seem to be confirming it)

Also, not being sure whether or not moral law exists, how do you go about constructing your moral positions?

djbt wrote:

Well... where can we go from here? Apart from morality not existing making discussion of morality fairly pointless, do you have any other reasons for believing that morality exists, or at least working under the assumption that it does? (I had high hopes that you would convince me to abandon the position that moral law does not exist, but rather you seem to be confirming it)

I operate under the assumption that morality exists because I believe that most people operate under the same assumption. Indeed, people who genuinely believe that there is no such thing as right or wrong are commonly regarded as sociopaths.

Is the individual the only legitimate judge of ethics? Are there any acts that are definitely right or definitely wrong?

Some people think that the physical environment is the shaper of morals.

You get polyandry and polygyny occuring in certain altitude and climatic conditions.There are also musical styles and types of behaviour seen in festivals which can be linked to geography.