Which ethical philosophy most closely approximates your own?

In My Humble Opinion
21

I’m not sure. Utilitarianism has the problem of the ways always justifying the means, which doesn’t work for me. But the categorical imperative is just too strong: there are really some cases where the ways justify the means. I also rate the correctness of my moral beliefs on what the rest society says, as, otherwise, there can be no objective morality for those who do not believe in God.

I do know that I equate egoism with evil, and find situationalism to just not make sense: how can there not be a general pattern in the moral choice of every situation?

On seeing Aanamika’s post, I will also say that I am not including ethical hedonism in egoism–hurting people for your own benefit is the reason I despise egoism. I actually think ethical hedonism is the default when you have no other ethical guidelines.

22

It dawns on me that it might be simpler if I just give the nutshell version of my ethical philosophy: What is good is that that does not harm society. One major exception is causing physical harm to others, which I sometimes believe I can justify as said person’s punishment or lack of existence being beneficial to society, but I instantly realize that doing so is wrong, even if I can’t explain why.

As I have said before, I also believe that, if you believe something is wrong, you will do something about it. Hence why I am quite vocal when I see that someone does something I consider wrong. It is my belief that most of the problems of the world exist not because “good people do nothing,” but because those “good people” aren’t really that good.

23

Everybody thinks they know the right way. They all lead to the same place.

24

I see my philosphy hasn’t changed much in 3 years…

25

Situational. And god, if you exist, spare me from people with principles. My wife’s stepfather had unwavering principles and it ruined two of his daughters’ lives. Prick.

26

Imperfect application of the categorical imperative. I’m human, and there are exceptions, but by and large that’s what I come back to.

27

This is just about mine, mixed with some societal humanism. I prioritize my moral drives as follows:

  1. Remove suffering and causes of suffering (Basic Buddhism, but without the strict interpretation of attachment necessarily being a cause of suffering)
  2. Pursue personal life pleasure
  3. Enable others in society to pursue their own personal pleasure

…and be nice to zombies.

28

secular humanism, although I don’t subscribe to the concepts of pseudoskepticism which permeate humanism.

But secular humanism is my ethical compass. Use advances in science, medicine, technology and cognition to create the most good and protection from the most harm for the most subjective consciousnesses as you can.