G. E. Moore (1873–1958)

I don't have the proper context in philosophical reading to know where the ideas in Moore's book fit into the larger philosophy canon, but I found this book to be worthwhile from a dabbler's perspective. Moore discusses the purpose of ethics, the naturalistic fallacy, hedonism, and the ideal. He states that good "does denote a simple and indefinable notion" and explains the problems that occur when we identify good with something other than good. It seems that this concept would be important to remember. Elements of both hedonism and the naturalistic fallacy seem to be included in many works of literary fiction, but I haven't particularly labeled the naturalistic fallacy in past reading. Moore is definitely recommended but not easy.… (altro)

Asking ethical questions is very difficult because clarity is required for clear answers, and clarifying the questions one posed is an extremely difficult task. This observation is true also for other philosophical fields where one retreats to the college dictum: "The answer to the question is conditioned by the terms of the question." While that may seem self-evident upon reflection, a surprising number of well-educated moderns working in critical ethical areas seem to stumble clumsily over these simple caveats.… (altro)