[fusion event]Empirical Ethical Intuitionism

Ethical intuitionism is the principle that humans have an ethical sense, and we can use that sense to infer what is moral in various circumstances.

The most vocal contemporary advocate of ethical intuitionism is a philosopher named Michael Huemer, who has written a book on the subject: [Ethical Intuitionism: Huemer, M.: 9780230573741: Amazon.com: Books](https://www.amazon.com/Ethical-Intuitionism-M-Huemer/dp/0230573746/ref=sr_1_1?crid=12IFWTLY1GBEP&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.-UUqra7JRc_AFf2jT9sX3PnZh4b9RLvwarY_UTpjzmLDpWo-BTt27Frmr9IAOEQAVfa7_zpRh-LlvUitVUg3C11SMBaiKjmltUD7w-VCx16kg2v8fg82cj4TyaEDOk2apNonYHc8e5RR_sxzU-uNP48cVpC-7C7yiiwTShlxVENCeeZcLXKhtOZ_fhAQjKmrGc59VUwrB-_TsgzENKox9oF0i5vBEVJBJMSLmkS0NG4.wQL5M6WLqm7sw7G4EbnOtMKzikTPBJATdGoCAXhuIjo&dib_tag=se&keywords=ethical+intuitionism&qid=1760832105&sprefix=ethical+intuitionalism%2Caps%2C163&sr=8-1)

Huemer far from the first advocate of an intuitive approach to ethics, and here are Wikipedia and the Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy’s takes on the subject: Ethical intuitionism - Wikipedia Intuitionism in Ethics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

I have not read Huemer’s work, instead I have only heard him on two podcasts. Here is a link to 6 interviews he has done: Ethical Intuitions
Huemer’s basic argument for ethical intuitivism is a “what else could ground ethics” argument. People are attracted to or repulsed by ethical theories, they “feel “ them to be true, or flawed, and this is a fundamentally intuition-based process. Huemer considers everyone to arrive at ethics intuitively, and they cannot be further explained.

I am also an ethical intuitivist, and have tried to think through further justifications and defenses of this view myself, and will offer my personal thinking from here.

Huemer does not provide an ontological or evolutionary justification for Ethical Intuitionism in the podcast I listened to, but I do. I consider ethical intuitionism to make the most sense from a small P platonist perspective. IF there is a moral reality to our universe, THEN it is plausible that detecting this moral reality is advantageous to us, THEREFORE we would be expected through evolutionary processes to develop a method of sensing this reality, which would then lead to our moral intuitions. Alternatively to abstract plationism, moral realism could be grounded in a strong emergence framework, where morality can be assumed to be an emergent property of human sociology, and once more we would have evolutionary advantage to develop a sensing skill for this aspect of reality.

Moral intuitivism must address the wide variance in our moral intuitions individual/individual, and in particular society/society. I offer an evolutionary explanation for this. First, some of our senses are – poor, and inaccurate. This can lead to confused moral intuitions. Additionally, evolution often co-opts and repurposes structures and functions within a species, and this seems to have been done to our moral sense. Humans are partially Eusocial Edward O. Wilson’s New Take on Human Nature and Eusocial species must have ways of preventing free riders from taking advantage of the group. Humans seem to have adapted our moral sense to the task, making us very subject to adopting moralizing ideologies, considering our in-group habits morally superior, and the out-group habits to be morally disgusting.

My empirical approach to epistemology is useful at this point. A Eusocially co-opted moral sense will give poor intuitions about one’s own society and social differences, but this in-group bias can be compensated for by looking at moral intuitions cross-culturally. IF one looks at cross-cultural consensus on moral saintliness, one can identify a common set of characteristics. Extreme empathy, lack of selfishness, and pursuit of moral purity over self aggrandizement are common traits, and can be considered core principles of a realist morality.

I then take empirical ethics a step further, applying the empirical process of “model fitting” to our intuitions, and comparing how well those models are considered cross culturally. There are three types of ethical theory that are pretty widely accepted cross-culturally, and those are Utilitarianism, Rights Ethic, and a higher virtues Virtue Ethic (Love, Truth, Beauty, and Agency). In most moral situations, these three tend to agree with each other.

Empiricism accepts that our models of our data often have flaws or limited range of applicability, and it is reasonable to treat these three models as ALL pretty good approximations of moral reality. For my own personal use, I use these three to guide my behavior, supplemented by two more that I think cover better some cases where these three have flaws: Eusocial ethics (the important subject for consequentialism is not individuals, but human society), and Deep Ecology ethics (where the consequentialist subject is all of life – Gaia).

Questions:
>> What do you folks think of the principles behind ethical intuitivism?
>> What are the alternatives to grounding a morality?
>> Are platonism or strong social emergence needed for ethical intuitivism to make sense? Are there alternatives?
>> Are the evolutionary rationales for ethical intuitivism convincing?
>> One of the major criticisms of all ethical realisms are the moral differences between societies. Does the Eusocial repurposing argument explain that successfully? Is the signal to noise method of studying cross –societal morality sufficiently strong to be credible?
>> Is the use of multiple moral theories in concert with each other a credible approach to morality?
>> Other?

We meet in person and online.
In person will be at 10113B Seattle Slew Lane. This meetup location does not have sufficient chairs for all of us, so it is advisory to bring a portable chair. The location also does not have food for sale. I will bring several large pizzas, and will request $2/slice. One pizza will be vegetarian. Tap water is available, please bring any other drinks desired.
Online will be: https://teams.live.com/meet/93583191724730?p=hY3jxVvnOciVl2aRn5