Q&A 10, Second Answer

My question is: What implications would radical freedom have for current ethical thought?

I think that accepting radical freedom would effectively demolish ethics.  Ethical theory often relies heavily on the idea that there is, or must be, an objective standard of morality, and radical freedom claims that such a thing is totally nonexistent.  This would cause ethics to deteriorate into an ultimately pointless study of individual codes of morality.

Of course, if the theory of radical freedom is actually true, then humanity should probably accept it as such.  Personally I do not think that it is true.  Unfortunately, there appears to be no way to prove that an objective morality exists.  Proof, however, may not be necessary; probability does seem to indicate the existence of an objective morality, and due to the problems which accepting radical freedom would cause, it is probably best for humanity to act upon the assumption that morality is in fact objective.