We ought to be conscientious because this benefits both the individual and the larger society.
We ought to be conscientious because this benefits both the individual and the larger society.
Since an ought judgment is a prescription that logically entails the corresponding imperative (and not a factual claim), ought judgments logically commit us to action under pain of inconsistency. Thus conscientiousness is justified as a species of logical consistency. <=> prescriptivism justification
We ought to be conscientious because this benefits both the individual and the larger society.
Since an ought judgment is a truth that logically entails the corresponding imperative, such judgments have a rational authority. If we accept an ought judgment but don't act on it, then we are logically inconsistent and violate rationality. <=> Kantian justification
We ought to be conscientious because this benefits both the individual and the larger society.
We ought to be conscientious because this benefits both the individual and the larger society. <=> utilitarianism justification
We ought to be conscientious because this benefits both the individual and the larger society.
We strive for conscientiousness because it promotes our desire to be a morally good person -- and because this requires that we try to do the right thing and avoid doing the wrong thing. <=> idealistic-desire justification
We ought to be conscientious because this benefits both the individual and the larger society.
Our judgments in favor of conscientiousness express our (actual or ideal) feelings in favor of it. <=> emotivism justification