What about it? I'm talking very early days of humanity, not just one hundred or two hundred years ago.
War is a perfect example as to how easily our morality is pushed around. If a single person kills another single person, it's murder. When in war, each killing is needed.
I feel like you're dealing in undefined absolutes -- you say things like "nature existed far before morality did" and "there was no question of morality", and then say "obviously you know why" or "surely you know" as if they're obvious axioms. Nothing about this is obvious to me, nor should it be. I don't necessarily disagree with any of your points, but when someone speaks in supposedly self-evident aphorisms, it's usually because they have no idea what they're talking about. Nothing personal, I do the same. I can admit it if you can. This isn't a simple subject.
Let's start over, because I feel like we're beginning to run in imprecise circles. What do you propose as a definition of a morally good act?
Here's what I suggest, and you are free to agree or disagree:
What we call morally good is that which is helps ensure the social cohesion (and by extension, survival) of one's own species.
By what I was saying by the "obviously you know why" is because I was basically saying that you're smart enough to understand it. I guess I must of made what I said unclear or un-understandable.
I agree with your last part. I think I was roughly trying to say that, or atleast something close to that but in complete different words. I agree 100% with what you said.
the nature of morality
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
What about it? I'm talking very early days of humanity, not just one hundred or two hundred years ago.
War is a perfect example as to how easily our morality is pushed around. If a single person kills another single person, it's murder. When in war, each killing is needed.
See how easily our morality is shifted?
--
Anonymous Post Author
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
I feel like you're dealing in undefined absolutes -- you say things like "nature existed far before morality did" and "there was no question of morality", and then say "obviously you know why" or "surely you know" as if they're obvious axioms. Nothing about this is obvious to me, nor should it be. I don't necessarily disagree with any of your points, but when someone speaks in supposedly self-evident aphorisms, it's usually because they have no idea what they're talking about. Nothing personal, I do the same. I can admit it if you can. This isn't a simple subject.
Let's start over, because I feel like we're beginning to run in imprecise circles. What do you propose as a definition of a morally good act?
Here's what I suggest, and you are free to agree or disagree:
What we call morally good is that which is helps ensure the social cohesion (and by extension, survival) of one's own species.
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
By what I was saying by the "obviously you know why" is because I was basically saying that you're smart enough to understand it. I guess I must of made what I said unclear or un-understandable.
I agree with your last part. I think I was roughly trying to say that, or atleast something close to that but in complete different words. I agree 100% with what you said.