Talk:Ethical naturalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Philosophy Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Additional information: This article has been marked as needing immediate attention! Related task forces (core areas): Ethics

[edit] Examination of definition

I removed this sentence from the "Examination of defition" section, because it appeared to contradict the definition given. "Non-reductive ethical naturalism holds that moral properties are not reducible to non-moral (i.e., natural) properties, but are supervenient upon those properties." Should there be two articles (definitions?)? One for reductive ethical naturalism and one for non-reductive? I don't know anything about the subject, so an expert should probably flesh out the article a little more. Chris 05:56, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] From Talk:Moral naturalism (article redirected here)

So "moral naturalism" is just another way of saying "the strong survive, the weak are killed and eaten"?

I mean, nobody's actually eating anybody else, but basically, if I understand the article correctly, it is "moral" for somebody rich and powerful to abuse the poor, simply because they can (and do) get away with it? Am I reading this correctly? xxxyyyzzz 22:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I do not believe you are reading this article correctly. Either that or you commented before the modern version. Moral naturalism is merely a proposition that moral facts/values are reducible to properities of the natural world. This does not neccessarilly entail egoism or any other theory. Canadianism 17:03, 21 October 2006 (UTC)