In my last post I claimed that there is no meaning, value, or normativity to be found in nature, that there is nothing natural beings ought to be, but that, rather, these judgments arise from us. Both here and on facebook this has led some to raise valuable questions about the coherence of these claims. The problem arises when the following three propositions are taken together:
1. There is nothing outside of nature.
2. Beings have no intrinsic meaning, purpose, or value (in and of themselves, there’s nothing they ought to be).
3. Value judgments about what beings and being ought to be arise from us and beings like us (bonobo apes, dolphins, institutions, birds of paradise, etc).
The problem arises between proposition 1 and 3. How can it both be true that there is nothing outside of being and that normative judgments belong to us and other beings capable…
View original post 2,486 more words