Intuitive Ethics

NON-FICTION; IT IS A (META)- ETHICAL ACCOUNT - PHILOSOPHICAL FACTUAL TEXT

SACHTEXT; ES HANDELT SICH UM EINE (META)- ETHISCHE THEORIE - PHILOSOPHISCHER SACHTEXT

In the thesis I defend the view that our ethics are fundamentally grounded in intuitions.

Of course I don't consider these propositions as some kind of holy grail of ethics: One big problem with the propositions is for example, that they are ridiculously vague which is why, I suspect, people of the past, presence and future won't except this kind of account as their holy grail of morals (and probably for good reasons) but rather continue with the sacred search. My point (in this may be the only real original thought of these propositions) is: To keep searching is pointless because vague - but nevertheless strongly felt, so strong that we would die for them! - intuitions are all we have, to ground our morals in. What else is there really? Any not radically vague moral-system is doomed to fail because our moral principles are derivatives of moral intuitions, beliefs which are based on strong emotions, which lead to judgments in the face of scenarios we encounter - real or imagined. These kinds of things: Intuitions, beliefs etc. are inherently vague; the only thing rationality can contribute here, is to review the degree of coherence (and eliminate dogmas, real dogmas, the ones, that are not self-evident but rely on heavy unjustified assumptions). So, I suggest we bite the bullet and drink deep of this vague, watery and rusty grail.

On the upside: We do escape the pit of moral relativism since, as I stated, there is a case to be made that these moral principles are valid and binding. It is also important to notice that the vague character of ethics doesn't diminish the importance of ethics and morals . These intuitions might in my not-so-humble opinion be the most important things in our whole existence.