Replies

Not at all. And if we get kicked to another thread, that's OK, too. Anyways, these concepts are highly fascinating. Well, for you and me at least, not generalizing here. Coming from the science field originally, I started only a year ago getting into this.

Metaphysical objectivism is close to positivism. That is, the notion that knowledge per se must be scientific knowledge. It requires that complex theories can be broken down into individual statements, at least some of which are testable. Contrarlily, constructivism demands that our idea of reality is a subjective construction rather than an assembly of objective statements.

So, if you now take these concepts to the fields of morality and ethics, for objectivism you would need to break down a complex topic (pick abortion) into individual fragments. Eventually, you will end up at the question "what is good" which gets you into a lot of readings. There is the Platonian discussions of good vs. evil (The Republic), you got the Macchiavellian notion of "good is what is good for the state" (The Prince) all the way over to modern leadership theory. Highly interesting stuff, but no simple final answer at the end. Thus, I do not believe in moral objectivism as I think the two are contradictory in terms.