“It falsely assumes that we should always want people to be disposed to perform any objectively right action.”
This undermines the study of morality. Ought implies can, and the entire purpose of discovering moral oughts is to provide practical ethical guidance for real agents that may otherwise be confused.
Otherwise, morality turns into meaningless theory rather than meaningful insight.
Yes, to analogize,it’s like drawing blueprints for inventions that can never work and calling that worthwhile as a fun intellectual exercise, without regard to producing real innovation. It reduces moral theorizing to a hobby, ultimately a waste of time.
If you’re going to draw blueprints for an invention, the goal is to build something that works.
You're not engaging with anything I wrote. (Consider the fundamental physics - practical technology analogy.) It's both untrue that theory "can never work" in helping us in practice, AND untrue that only practical things matter.
If a blueprint doesn’t work then it’s not a “fundamental truth”.
The same with moral theory. If it fails the test of real world application it needs to be reworked until it does. Otherwise, there is no truth discovered.
It may be helpful as a discovery as one of the 1000 “wrong” ways to make a lightbulb. But proof of an ethical theory’s truth is only in application.
“It falsely assumes that we should always want people to be disposed to perform any objectively right action.”
This undermines the study of morality. Ought implies can, and the entire purpose of discovering moral oughts is to provide practical ethical guidance for real agents that may otherwise be confused.
Otherwise, morality turns into meaningless theory rather than meaningful insight.
See the "So why care about moral theory?" section of my post.
Yes, to analogize,it’s like drawing blueprints for inventions that can never work and calling that worthwhile as a fun intellectual exercise, without regard to producing real innovation. It reduces moral theorizing to a hobby, ultimately a waste of time.
If you’re going to draw blueprints for an invention, the goal is to build something that works.
You're not engaging with anything I wrote. (Consider the fundamental physics - practical technology analogy.) It's both untrue that theory "can never work" in helping us in practice, AND untrue that only practical things matter.
If a blueprint doesn’t work then it’s not a “fundamental truth”.
The same with moral theory. If it fails the test of real world application it needs to be reworked until it does. Otherwise, there is no truth discovered.
It may be helpful as a discovery as one of the 1000 “wrong” ways to make a lightbulb. But proof of an ethical theory’s truth is only in application.