Is it possible to speak with certainty when talking about ethics?

[Boojatta]

Poll question: Is it possible to speak with certainty when talking about ethics?

Given enough assumptions (one of which might be the assumption that there are differences of opinion about whether or not some particular conduct is ethical), it is possible to arrive at the conclusion that ethics is subjective. However, it is important to note that we mentioned ethics. Some assumptions allow us to reach the conclusion: "ethics is subjective." These assumptions are known to be reliable, but they are specialized assumptions that refer specifically to the topic of ethics. If we were to construct analogous assumptions and try to apply them elsewhere, then we might find that they are unreliable and yield false conclusions.

For example, suppose we were to try to apply similar reasoning to chess. What does chess have to do with ethics? Chess is a game with specific rules that are known; those rules specify under what circumstances the game comes to an end. Ethics is completely different. Thus, there are specific assumptions that mention ethics and that are known without any doubt to be reliable, but analogous assumptions that mention chess are of unknown reliability.

[cosmik debris]

1. Ethics are opinions

You can have as many as you want. They are unlimited.

[MADem]

2. Well, it ain't "ethical" to kill someone, in the opinion of many who believe that no one should do

such a thing...but if you're standing in Hitler's bunker with a clear shot in the middle of WW2, you might find the prohibition against murder a bit, shall we say, "subjective."

The world is not a chess board, clearly.

[Goblinmonger]

3. Ethics are clearly subjective

or there wouldn't be so much discussion and debate about what is ethical. If it weren't subjective and clearly was certain, you could just plug the situation into a computer and it would spit out the answer.

[katsy]

4. Ethics are the social constructs.

Murder is not moral in this society.

But the murderer's right to a fair trial is ethical.

Morals are subjective to a social group. Ethics not so much.

i.e. Imus' attack on the Rutgers Team was morally offensive and demanded retribution. The market (under pressure from society - all of us) behaved ethically in booting him off the air.

[frebrd]

5. Yes, it's possible...

if you're capable of thinking for yourself, rather than allowing someone/something else to do your thinking for you.