Philosophy Now Forum

Ethics is, in order of moral maturity;

duty ethics, an abdication of morality
consequence ethics, fails to account for intent
virtue ethics, contingent
priority ethics, the glue that makes the rest manageable

This understanding perfectly mirrors childhood development. At first we are authoritarian - duty ethics. "Do as i say because i can make you and you don't know what you're talking about." Moral subject.

At some point we consider them a moral agent and ease them into "Look what you did, you caused bad/good things to happen." This is moral maturity at a minimum, accounting for externalities.

Then later, "Ok, now that your understand what people want from you and have some idea of how to produce certain effects, you're ready to decide how you want to be better than that on your own. Here's a menu." Virtue ethics.

Having one's priorities straight is a higher bar and one not too many people ever reach. If you can, you will aptly manage the other three in various situations. This would probably be recognized as wisdom.

Advocate wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 6:16 pm duty ethics, an abdication of morality

. . . At first we are authoritarian - duty ethics. "Do as i say because i can make you and you don't know what you're talking about." Moral subject.

You know that's not what deontological ethics conventionally is in philosophy, right?

[quote="Terrapin Station" post_id=494245 time=1612451369 user_id=12582]
[quote=Advocate post_id=494002 time=1612286161 user_id=15238]
duty ethics, an abdication of morality

. . . At first we are authoritarian - duty ethics. "Do as i say because i can make you and you don't know what you're talking about." Moral subject.
[/quote]

You know that's not what deontological ethics conventionally is in philosophy, right?
[/quote]

Right, that's the version of it we give to children.