If goodness were wholly empirical, moral obligations would reduce to statistical or causal regularities, which lack the categorical binding force Kant and intuitionists alike recognize as constitutive of morality.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Categorical binding force(as used in Kantian ethics): The sense that a rule applies to you no matter what—it's not optional or dependent on what you happen to want; it commands obedience unconditionally.
Constitutive of morality(as used in meta-ethics): A feature that is essential to what makes something *count* as morality in the first place—without it, you wouldn't really have morality at all.
Empirical: # Empirical Empirical means based on real observation, experience, or experiments rather than theory or guessing. When something is empirical, it's proven by actually testing it or seeing it happen in the real world, not just thinking about it logically. For example, empirical evidence might be data collected from a survey or results from a scientific experiment that shows what actually occurs.
Kant(as used in epistemology and metaphysics): Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was an influential German philosopher who argued that our minds shape how we experience reality, and that we can only truly know things as they appear to us, not as they are in themselves.

Based on where you are in your exploration