2012
This text is a brief description of the positions on philosophy that I have arrived at after settling the philosophical problems that I have had.
Settling epistemological and metaphysical problems mostly amounts to dissolving philosophical misconceptions, remaining with that the world just is in some way, like a collection of facts. Compare to Church’s thesis, which some may have considered to contain a philosophical problem; settled by viewing the thesis as a definition by Turing of computable, just like any other (correct) mathematical definition.
There is no reason for there to be anything besides the world. All there is, also when it comes to ethics, is practical, ordinary reasoning.
It is a mistake to philosophize about ethics being founded outside the world. Even if ethics is founded outside the world in some non-naturalistic fashion --- as in the latter answer to Euthyphro’s dilemma whether God wants something because it is good or if something is good because God wants it --- we don't know anything more about it. We can only assume that valid ordinary reasons are also valid in a non-naturalistic sense. So in practice it makes no difference whether there is an outside foundation or not. In other words, it is a mistake to talk about a non-naturalistic foundation; but even granted a non-naturalistic foundation, we can only assume that our practical, ordinary reasons hold also non-naturalistically.
Therefore it is wrong to a priori superimpose overarching ideas of what is good for perceived e.g. philosophical reasons. For example, it is wrong to blanketly assume that only happiness matters. This is not to say though that some utilitarian-like argument can’t be valid in a practical, ordinary reasoning when it comes to what is right in some particular case. (Compare to for example the continuum hypothesis. While the set theory ZFC is true or useful, not every sentence in ZFC is necessarily meaningful or useful. Regardless of whether the continuum hypothesis is true or false or not meaningful or useful at all, inquiry into the validity of the continuum hypothesis should be guided by mathematical reasoning and not by philosophical ideas.)
Daniel Vallstrom 2012-05-19