Does the world need more ethics?

[prof]

In the next post I shall discuss these two questions:
Does the science of Ethics have a formula?
Is Ethics subjective or objective?

Right now I have these questions for all readers and posters:


In your opinion, do the people of the world need to know and to practice ethics?

Does the case for Ethics presented in the o.p. begun here: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=13302 -- and continued here: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=13696 - does that do the job as a summary of ethics?

And then (for those who want further implications and methods of analysis) the case for Ethics is added to in this document here: http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BASIC%20ETHICS.pdf -- [You may want to skip the first 12 pages which are written for post-graduate-school philosophers] This booklet supplements the case for Ethics by showing lots of implications that follow from the original premises and by offering three tools of analysis, S, E, and I, which enable you - or any other ethical theorist - to take specific moral values, evaluate them, and applying those tools solve moral dilemmas.

I ask you: Des that combined argument get to the essence of the subject?

Is the presentation logical enough, and elegant enough, as to be persuasive?

How can we make the topic simpler - so as to communicate it to the average person?


Rounding out the theory, the motivation, advantages and benefits for being ethical are presented (in the 2nd-6th paragraphs of the o.p. HERE:: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=13672

For those students and researchers who care to acquire a fuller picture of the theory some of the implications that follow from the definition of the field of Ethics and from the axiom of the entire theory are presented briefly, in the o.p., HERE: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=13402 -- and supplemented in paragraph 8 ff of the o.p. HERE: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=9512


Do you agree with this proposition? Ethics is a vast field, and - just as is true of Physics - it cannot be summarized in a few words.

I'd like to know your answers to these questions

[prof]

.


Does the science of Ethics have a formula?

Is Ethics subjective or objective?

Yes it does have a formula, and yes, it is both. Permit me to explain:

The formula, I > E > S, helps to codify, condense, and make crisp in our minds the relationships among the basic value dimensions: S, E, and I. These dimensions were derived in Value Science [Formal Axiology.] Before we can analyze ethical data (i.e., moral values) we need to know values. That study takes logical priority.

Let’s assume, for a moment, that the Universe has ordered these values, and man discovers the order. The ordering is objective; it is a natural phenomenon, like the Law of Gravity, or any other physical law. Robert Hartman, about 52 years ago, after focusing on the topic all his life, made a breakthrough: he discovered this natural, universal order. He did not invent it, he found it. He named it the Hierarchy of Value, the HOV. It is displayed in that formula.

“The measure of value is universal and objective. It should be noted that the applications of value are subjective.” --- Robert S. Hartman

When human beings value, make judgments, set priorities, they can mess things up. And they do. But it doesn’t matter to the natural law that orders values whether we violate the order, or we align with it. If we violate the HOV we get distress, or we suffer!! If we align ourselves with it, we gain a high quality life [a QL .] It does not matter if you believe there is a Value Law in the Universe or you do not: the fact is that you will be hurt if you violate the order, the HOV. And if you live in alignment with it you will enjoy a quality life! {If one goes through life subtracting value he will live in a world that is out of balance, unstable, unsustainable; and either he, or those he loves, or those who love him will pay a price, will suffer in some way as a result. If, however, one makes things morally better, if one creates and adds value he will live a Quality Life, he will be happy and flourish. This is a verifiable prediction.}

It is obvious, and plain to see – for those willing to look enough – that violations of the Hierarchy of Vale cause suffering and result in a diminished quality of life. To become a better person, a more-ethical individual, one needs to develop himself - as explained in further detail in BASIC ETHICS - http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BASIC%20ETHICS.pdf

What do you think?