Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
705 bytes removed ,  01:48, June 14, 2010
m
Reverted edits by BDRothschild (Talk) to last revision by Rcgallup
Line 5: Line 5:  
People also derive codes of ethics from several other sources, among them being personal values, personal gain, and what things harm other people. There are many philosophical schools of ethics. Some meta-ethicists deny the objectivity of right and wrong, but more rational schools of thought generally prevail.
 
People also derive codes of ethics from several other sources, among them being personal values, personal gain, and what things harm other people. There are many philosophical schools of ethics. Some meta-ethicists deny the objectivity of right and wrong, but more rational schools of thought generally prevail.
   −
In [[legal]] terminology, ethics means relating to [[moral]] action and conduct; professionally right; conforming to professional standards.
+
In [[legal]] terminology, ethics means relating to [[moral]] action and conduct; professionally right; conforming to professional standards.  
−
  −
==Limits of naturalism and materialism in ethics==
  −
As the Scottish philosopher [[David Hume]] outlined no set of information about how the material world "is" constructed can give us an answer about what we "ought" to do in order to be ethical. All ethical standards must therefore be include some ethical source beyond the material world. "Is" information can be used to extend an "ought" directive from one situation to another, for instance "thou shalt not kill" can be combined with the material world information that destroying someones crops is going to lead to their starvation and death and you arrive at the moral direction "You ought not to destroy your neighbors crops".
      
== See also ==
 
== See also ==
    
*[[Christianity in Conservapedia]]
 
*[[Christianity in Conservapedia]]
−
*[[Is-ought problem]]
+
 
     
nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
26,487

edits

Navigation menu