Skip to content
September 1, 2015 / compassioninpolitics

Critique of ethical skepticism

The problem with skepticism is that people are non-skeptics in real life. That is, when the philosopher or debater leaves the office, they no longer hold true nor can they.

Skepticism radically undermines any hope of progress. It undermines abductive logic and it undermines the knowledge bases that help us think about and explore the future.

Not to mention, that ethical claims aren’t the same as scientific claims.

Relationships need guidelines. Fairness and contract. If you’ve ever been wronged, its been values which have resolved the conflict.

The language of values is necessary for human community. Without values life in community is paralysis, anarchy, or both.


Bernie says lots of stuff that has moral or normative implications.  The call for political action is always in the context of ethical claims.

A true moral skeptic can’t be an existentialist either.  Its an ethical system in the same way anarchism is a political theory.

Big double bind–either existentialism is a ethics or relativism.  Or at least it links to all the disads of relativism.

DA to your alternative is ethical discussions that are meaningful. (ie debate that has the possibility of some resolution).

Any ought or should or even suggestion about behavior is normative.

Moral systems trade-off.  Unless you come to grips with that–you’ve lost the game.

You ideally pick the best one, not the perfect one.  Because otherwise you throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Newsflash–Nothing on earth is perfect.  Thats the nature of earthy existence.  We have to choose what is best.  Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good or good enough.

This is at the core of why you’re cognitively dissonant even if you don’t know you are:


never know what is the most “ethical” way to act assuming that being “ethical” is even a thing anyway.

We never know what the best course of action is, that isn’t a justification for inaction or paralysis or twiddling our thumbs.


DA to skepticism is no means to judge debates and have meaningful exchanges–because its all just feelings and emotions.  Specifically theres also no reason contestants deserve fairness or objectivity on the part of judges.  It becomes just a gut feeling.

Also Hiter, genocide, dehumanization, and every moral evil ever.  People are crushed under the power of big organizations without a language of accountability, fairness, or justice.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: