That's why I thought it was a weak argument, once I got to the bottom of it. Wah-men, I tell you....
Discussion
GM brothers 🧐
But isn’t she right to insist on a higher standard for morals?
The theory sounds pretty democratic to me, just because leftist “liberals” believe it’s “fair” to take taxes and use force to steal and redistribute money- doesn’t mean it is a moral good to do so.
The elephant and rider can go and crush our houses if allowed to!
It wasn't that she was insisting on a higher moral standard. Her points was that social sciences are a 'soft" science and aren't fully concrete.
I don't think the theory is about what should be, but more about what is.
Whether liberals believe taxation is fair or not, while it may not be moral from a libertarian perspective, Moral Foundation theory simply observes that framework. It doesn't prescribe it as good or bad.
I think it would be more a political (objective) theory then? Maybe that’s what she meant by “soft science”
Morality is objective (Plato’s moral realism, Natural Law) imo 🤓