Value of ethics
The theory of possible worlds, and metaethics, has undeniably often been disregarded as a useless armchair activity by journalists, scholars, writers, and even philosophers (Borge, 2000). The speculative metaphysician is seen conjuring abstract pictures of the world, which are consequently meaningless since their truth are not subject to empirical measures. However, despite this dismissive criticisms of the concept of possible worlds, it is inescapable due to the inherent speculative nature of questions during an approach of things in the world (Lowe, 2002). In ethics, the possible world argument consists of a philosophical technique of quantifying over all possible worlds when considering the situations which an ethical theory should deal with. Additionally, during contemplation of the difference in reactions among humans in different scenarios, the main question posed by ethics is “whether there exists a world in the scope of possible worlds which certain maxims and principles fail to apply, but which apply to our own” (Borge, 2000). As such, ethics becomes vital to the theory of possible worlds as enables the determination of the world sensitivity, grants a deeper appreciation of the ramifications of counterfactualities and assists in designing a scope of limitation.
Ethics undoubtedly assists in determining whether the concept of possible worlds is world sensitive or not. The world sensitivity of a theory is dependent on the question of whether the specific theory conforms to the variance in the principles, maxims and rules of the actualities of the world we live in, and its relevance (Borge, 2000). Such sensitivity is crucial in developing a deeper understanding of the reality of life, and provides an avenue for the resolution of the prevailing problems affecting human beings as they try to cope with the world. Notably, the lack of sensitivity of possible worlds to the realities of the vision of mankind is possibly the reason for its dismissal as mere meaningless speculation and nonsense. For instance, in his introduction Bricker, posits of a possibility of a world with unicorns, dragons or flying pigs (Bricker, 2008). Ethics therefore intervenes as a determinant of the sensitivity of the possible world’s theory.
The vital assistance by ethics in determining the sensitivity of the advances of the possible world theory is seen explicitly expressed in the grounding of the concept in the accepted reality. Theories of ethics are an already accepted part of reality. As such, such acceptance, when associated with possible world theory, makes the concept more plausible and acceptable in the world. For instance, using the example given earlier, the talk of flying pigs and unicorns definitely absurd. However, when they are replaced with the ethics, that is, the possibilities of actions and consequences of the various choices human beings make in their every day, the theory becomes more digestible, and consequently its acceptance. This achievement is expressed in popular culture, where films such as Another Version of You which explores, superficially, the possible world theory in relation to the choices we make in romance, friendship and work life. As such, ethics greatly assists the sensitization of the possible world theory, hence critical. Notably, this determination of sensitivity is connected to the designing of a scope of limitation.
Arguably, ethics is also vital to the possible world theory as it assists in the designing of a scope of limitation. Notably, the various possibilities in the possible world theory surpass any conceivable horizon, hence ad infinitum (Lowe, 2002). This wide array of possibilities is very problematic, especially considering the content of its truth or falsity cannot be determined through empirical means. The endless modal truths, beyond empirical comprehension, further contribute to the theories critic dismissal, and the reference of metaphysicians as irrational skeptics. As such, the creation of endless possibilities necessitate the need for the designing of a scope of limitation, in full contemplation of the nature of our reality, and that’s where ethics becomes critical. Notably, the scope of limitation within the theory of possible worlds has also been scholarly explored.
Ethics assists in the designing of a scope of limitation for the possible worlds by providing a reference point for relevance relation. This is achievable through the provision of a limited context for the exploration of the possible worlds, for instance, in the exploration of the moral content of an action in Kantianism. As per Kant, there exists only one true morality whose principles must be obeyed by any rational creature whatever the consequences (Borge, 2000). As such, morality is objective, and for any action to have moral content, it conform to the one true morality. In the possible worlds, therefore, when an agent does an action adverse with the one true morality, that act is a wrong in all the other possible worlds, hence a violation to the right of mankind. The preceding example therefore, through the provision of a limited context for the determination of whether actions are right or wrong, grounds the possible world theory in the reality of the actual world, and its relevance. As such, this relevance relation theme designs a scope of limitation for the possibilities, hence making ethics vital to the possible world theory. Notably, the nature of this relevance relation possibilities relates to a deeper appreciation for the ramifications of counterfactualites.
The deeper appreciation of the nature and ramifications of counterfactualites arguably constitutes another reason why ethics is vital to the possible world theory. Notably, in the conceptualization of the possible worlds, there is no regard for the ontological status of things, and their meanings (Bricker, 2008). The possible world theory is seen to adopt a neutral stance in relation to ethics (Borge). This is understandable in light of the principles of the utilitarianism theorem of ethics. As per Mills, “the creed which accepts as the foundation of morals utility, or the greatest happiness principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, while wrongs tend to produce the reverse of happiness”. Utilinatiarism therefore appreciates the contexts of each action and the preferences of the agent in the decision culminating to the promotion of happiness. For instance, if an agent is faced with the decision to sacrifice an innocent for the greatest happiness in its world, the act therefore becomes moral, even though it is immoral in another world. This example, therefore, provokes the pondering on the ramifications of such possibilities to the actual world.
Notably, the consideration of the existence of such possibilities is essential in the crafting of the future by human beings. Human beings are by nature planners with intellect, who seek to bring the existence of certain status of events in the future. The deeper consideration of the ramifications of such possibilities in the possible world theory therefore becomes necessary, as such counterfactualties may become the reality due to the changing nature of society (Borge,2000). It is this consideration of the possibilities that forms the basis of the critiquing of utilitarianism theory of ethics, due to the flexibility of morality based on context. Such flexibility, it is argued, may lead to the justification of gross violation of human rights through morally sanctioned actions like murder. Therefore, ethics is critical to possible world theory as it occasions the deeper appreciation of the counterfactualities advanced by the theorem.
The preceding irrefutably that ethics is critical to possible world theorem as it assists in determining the sensitivity of the theory to the world, the understanding of the consequences of the possibilities, and the designing of a scope of limitation. Notably, the critical value of ethics greatly enhances the contemporary acceptance of the theorem, and its subsequent superficial exploration in popular culture. To further advance the possible world theory, it is recommendable for metaphysicians to relate the theory to contemporary issues of interest such as religion and morality as they retain the interests of the students better.