Me: How can multiple objective ethical viewpoints exist without proving ethics are subjective? You would have to prove, or substaniate in some way that a certain objective ethical framework stands above others. Seeing as how this remains a popular philosophical debate, im guessing you cant prove that.

ChatGPT: popular ethical frameworks that could be adopted by a person include: denotational ethics, utilitarism, virtue ethics, natural law theory, divine command theory, moral realism, human rights theory, contractualism, objectivism, moral absolutism, pragmatism, rule consequentialism, ethical intuitionism, platonism in ethics, the doctorine of double effect.

Me: if you are saying its a moral choice to adopt an ethical framework, and thats why each of these choices are not subjective in themselves, isnt that kind of obtuse and a semantic argument? Which is exactly what i would expect from a lemming. Because thats the way internet arguments are won.

My friend: Tee is right on this one.

You: Damn man you are right.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago

Invoking pure utilitarianism and the idea of babies consenting?

Got a good laugh out of me. Gr8 b8 I r8 8 out of 8

[–] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

you, Kant, always have what you want.

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Kant didn't support Utilitarianism, he was in favour of categorical imperatives that were always true.

[–] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Hence the pun