[The biologization of ethics]

Area of Science:

• Philosophy of Ethics
• Bioethics
• Social Philosophy

Context:

• The naturalistic fallacy, as defined in analytical philosophy, posits that one cannot derive an 'ought' from an 'is'.
• Traditional ethical frameworks often lack a concrete, material basis, leading to abstract and potentially inapplicable principles.
• Human experience is fundamentally rooted in biological and social realities, suggesting ethics must also be grounded in these foundations.

Purpose:

• To challenge the naturalistic fallacy by proposing a material and biological foundation for ethics.
• To establish a philosophical basis for three distinct ethical frameworks: ethics of the species, ethics of liberation, and ethics of responsibility.
• To connect these foundational ethics to practical applications in medical bioethics, development ethics, and environmental ethics.

Summary:

• This work presents a non-formal, material argument for ethics, refuting the naturalistic fallacy.
• It identifies three key ethical dimensions rooted in the human experience: the body (ethics of the species), society (ethics of liberation), and nature (ethics of responsibility).
• These foundational ethics, drawing from thinkers like Habermas, Dussel, and Jonas, provide a philosophical basis for applied ethical fields.

Impact:

• Provides a robust philosophical grounding for applied ethics, bridging abstract theory with practical concerns.
• Offers a novel perspective on the naturalistic fallacy, integrating biological and social realities into ethical considerations.
• Facilitates a more comprehensive understanding and development of medical bioethics, development ethics, and environmental ethics by connecting them to fundamental ethical principles.