Philosophy Now Forum

I noted morality is commonly associated with 'rightness' and 'wrongness'.
But it is also noted that such associations had failed humanity and the essence within morality had not progress effectively as evident with the present state of evil acts.

In a way, I am proposing a Copernican Revolution that leverages morality within all humans.

It is also very evident that the focus on morality is to avoid evil acts, i.e. killing of humans, rape, violence and other crimes against humans and humanity.
Thus morality is leveraged on evil acts, i.e. to prevent evil acts.

Not all good acts are necessary related to morality.
Whatever are good acts, e.g. honesty, kind, and the likes are virtues and would be more effectively dealt within "virtues".

As I had stated, to leverage on 'right' or 'wrong' is very messy for morality [prevention of evil] because each party will claim the 'right' of others is 'wrong' and vice versa thus ending with stalemates which hinder forward progress.

'morality-proper': ' 'Morality' [proper] is like say 'wisdom' or 'intelligence' where the focus in on the self-development and continual improvements of these internal potentials of the individual[s].'
It is not an opinion nor belief.

I justified the above as true [avoid using 'right'] empirically via the existence of physical mirror neurons [scientific fact] inherent in all humans which are responsible for empathy which is a critical element of morality within the moral FSK.
As such it follows this fact is a moral fact.

Any counter the above?

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 9:59 am I noted morality is commonly associated with 'rightness' and 'wrongness'.
But it is also noted that such associations had failed humanity and the essence within morality had not progress effectively as evident with the present state of evil acts.

So you just decided to open with a circular argument like that?

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 9:59 am As I had stated, to leverage on 'right' or 'wrong' is very messy for morality [prevention of evil] because each party will claim the 'right' of others is 'wrong' and vice versa thus ending with stalemates which hinder forward progress.
Any counter the above?

Sure, you move away from rightness wrongness because each party will claim the right of others is wrong.
Well, that will happen with moving toward virtues and trying to prevent evil acts.

You are just using different synonyms.

And even if you make this about character, aiming for empathetic people or any other possible virtuous character trait. Or if you aim to minimize negative character traits, each party will claim that the other party's avoided should be included and the other party's included virtues should be excluded.

This is not a revolution. A rose by any other name......