If your standard is âexplains human (and animal) behaviorâ, I think you again canât make moral progress, because you no longer have any reason to deviate from past human behavior. For example, âwe should maximize pleasure and minimize painâ seems terrible at explaining observations like slavery, war, torture, etc.
âhumans seek out pleasure and avoid painâ is universal, so it seems like a good reason to say that pleasure and the avoidance of pain have absolute value. âhumans seek to enslave, war and tortureâ is not universal and so does not seem like a good reason to say that these things have absolute value; and even if it is some weak evidence that these things have value to some people, it is dwarfed by the very strong evidence that their consequences have significant negative value, since nearly everyone tries to avoid being enslaved, tortured, etc.
(caveat: i happen to think value is necessarily relational, but that is perhaps getting too sidetracked.)
thanksâi read christianoâs post.
âhumans seek out pleasure and avoid painâ is universal, so it seems like a good reason to say that pleasure and the avoidance of pain have absolute value. âhumans seek to enslave, war and tortureâ is not universal and so does not seem like a good reason to say that these things have absolute value; and even if it is some weak evidence that these things have value to some people, it is dwarfed by the very strong evidence that their consequences have significant negative value, since nearly everyone tries to avoid being enslaved, tortured, etc.
(caveat: i happen to think value is necessarily relational, but that is perhaps getting too sidetracked.)