People who fear moral nihilism are not worried about losing control over their own behavior, they are worried about losing control over other people’s behavior.
Is the threat from philosophy really a concern? We control others through punishment. A nihilist is still going to be powerfully incentivized by the threat of punishment.
Is the threat from philosophy really a concern? We control others through punishment.
We (or rather society) controls its members through a public theory of morality, which can also be thought of as a moral Schelling point. Punishments are used to deal with the people who commit disregard the public theory and in so doing help to maintain belief in it. However, without a public theory that most people believe, or at least don’t openly disbelieve, the system for enforcing punishment quickly breaks down.
What people abstractly philosophise about is not all that important. It is what they unconsciously associate with punishment or lowered status that will control their behavior.
It is what they unconsciously associate with punishment or lowered status that will control their behavior.
Which is in the long run influenced by conscious beliefs and abstract philosophy. The history of revolutions should be enough to show that consciously held beliefs and philosophies matter.
Sometimes it is necessary to control what people say through punishment as well as what they do. In some cases punishment via verbal abuse—and the associated threat of lowered status—is enough to exert the desired control.
I think Constant has a good point. When it comes to morality, and controlling people’s behavior it isn’t philosophical reasoning that people turn to, even though solid philosophy usually resolves to reasonably good outcomes. It is punishment, threat and power. Because that is what works for making people do what you want them to do. (Well, reward helps too—but certainly isn’t what ‘morality’ is all about!)
Is the threat from philosophy really a concern? We control others through punishment. A nihilist is still going to be powerfully incentivized by the threat of punishment.
We (or rather society) controls its members through a public theory of morality, which can also be thought of as a moral Schelling point. Punishments are used to deal with the people who commit disregard the public theory and in so doing help to maintain belief in it. However, without a public theory that most people believe, or at least don’t openly disbelieve, the system for enforcing punishment quickly breaks down.
What people abstractly philosophise about is not all that important. It is what they unconsciously associate with punishment or lowered status that will control their behavior.
Which is in the long run influenced by conscious beliefs and abstract philosophy. The history of revolutions should be enough to show that consciously held beliefs and philosophies matter.
Sometimes it is necessary to control what people say through punishment as well as what they do. In some cases punishment via verbal abuse—and the associated threat of lowered status—is enough to exert the desired control.
I think Constant has a good point. When it comes to morality, and controlling people’s behavior it isn’t philosophical reasoning that people turn to, even though solid philosophy usually resolves to reasonably good outcomes. It is punishment, threat and power. Because that is what works for making people do what you want them to do. (Well, reward helps too—but certainly isn’t what ‘morality’ is all about!)