 Bertrand Russell Quotes 366 |
When we examine what purport to be ethical statements, we find that they differ from statements asserting matters of fact by the presence of one or both of two terms, "ought" and "good", or their synonyms. Are these terms, or equivalents of them, part of any minimum vocabulary of ethics? Or are they definable in terms of desires and emotions and feelings? And, if so, do they have essential reference to the desires and emotions and feelings of the person using the words, or have they a reference to the general desires and emotions and feelings of mankind?
Source: Bertrand Russell: Human Society in Ethics and Politics, (1954), chapter98：Is there ethical knowledge ?
More info.:https://russell-j.com/cool/47T-0902.htm
* a brief comment
When someone says, "It should be..." or "... is a good thing," we often think that they are just expressing their personal feelings (not objective matters). it might be? On the other hand, when we make similar statements, we tend to think that if everyone understands the facts correctly, they should think the same way as we do (our statements are not subjective assertions). Is it not?
By the way, "in terms of" has the meaning of "in point of view" as well as "in the words of...", and ChatGPT and Google gemini interpreted it as "in terms of...". However, when I argued the following, ChatGPT agreed with my interpretation.
＜I＞
Russell asks whether the terms ``ought'' and ``good'' are part of the minimal vocabulary of ethics, or if they are not part of the minimal vocabulary but are further defined in other terms. I'm asking if it's possible. Therefore, ``in terms of'' does not mean ``in terms of...'' but seems to be saying ``Can it be further defined in terms (of desires, emotions, and feelings)?'' What do you think? Russell asked whether the terms ``ought'' and ``good'' are part of the minimal vocabulary of ethics, or if they are not part of the minimal vocabulary, but in other terms (and further). I'm asking if it can be defined. Therefore, I think that "in terms of" does not mean "in terms of..." but rather "Can it be further defined in terms (of desires, emotions, and feelings)?" What do you think?