I’ve struggled with figuring out what ethical system I follow; closest is nursing, which is a pluralistic approach. But looking at neurobiology, impaired personal decision-making might compel deontology that depends on consequentialist background, only having an internal rudder;

I’ve struggled with figuring out what ethical system I follow; closest is nursing, which is a pluralistic approach.
 
But looking at neurobiology, impaired personal decision-making might compel deontology that depends on consequentialist background, only having an internal rudder;
That is, I cannot physically answer “Where do you see things in 5 years?” because I can’t trust long term predictions due to the variability of the present, this view likely informed by having a noisy brain that weighs current choices so heavily (noisy present), must trust ‘gut’.
 So do we have a luxury of really choosing which ethical system we follow? We can weigh them out as best we can, but won’t we ultimately end up with one that matches best our neurobiology? Congruence to action in free choice is not automatic; we may choose what we don’t follow
==
 I also believe in free will; the variability of the present compels its freedom; so many choices, it must continually choose and impress its choices to pass thresholds of action for results to maybe follow; but sets of parallel actions in serial, with manipulation always possible

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


nine − 9 =

Leave a Reply