Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Where did morals come from?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 14
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 14 template Next
  • #76
    Originally posted by Kidicious
    It is just as arbitrary.


    Not any more than having two eyes is "arbitrary", or the ability to observe patterns is "arbitrary". It's evolution. It may not pass information down directly through genetic inheritence (thought I'm sure there is a genetic tendency towards most basic morals), but it is still subject to natural selection. Those societies whose members have certain morals, and are good at instilling those morals, succeed, while those societies which are not, or which have different morals, don't. Those morals that are significantly different between cultures are the "arbitrary" morals.

    Comment

    • #77
      Originally posted by Kidicious
      The thing is that humans have the ability to create any order that they wish. That's what seperates us from other animals. Animals only have one possible order if any social order at all.
      Total BS, and it misses the point.

      There are lots of species that could be considered one-of-a-kind. It doesn't mean that what they do isn't "natural".

      The way you use "natural", you mean "not made or affected by man". It's a completely useless meaning of the term.

      btw, are beaver dams natural?

      Comment

      • #78
        Originally posted by Kuciwalker
        Originally posted by Kidicious
        It is just as arbitrary.


        Not any more than having two eyes is "arbitrary", or the ability to observe patterns is "arbitrary". It's evolution. It may not pass information down directly through genetic inheritence (thought I'm sure there is a genetic tendency towards most basic morals), but it is still subject to natural selection. Those societies whose members have certain morals, and are good at instilling those morals, succeed, while those societies which are not, or which have different morals, don't. Those morals that are significantly different between cultures are the "arbitrary" morals.
        I won't argue there, but the rulers are successfull at reinforcing their morality. That's how the society succeeds or fails. If the rulers fail so does the society, and a new society emerges with a new morality.
        I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
        - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

        Comment

        • #79
          The rulers are just as much a part of society as the subjects.

          Comment

          • #80
            Originally posted by Kuciwalker
            btw, are beaver dams natural?


            Of course they are. Don't start coming at me with some ridiculous libertarian definitions either please.
            I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
            - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

            Comment

            • #81
              Originally posted by Kuciwalker
              The rulers are just as much a part of society as the subjects.
              The significance is that the rulers have more power.
              I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
              - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

              Comment

              • #82
                Originally posted by Kidicious


                Of course they are. Don't start coming at me with some ridiculous libertarian definitions either please.
                libertarian?!

                Where'd that come from?

                Comment

                • #83
                  Originally posted by Kuciwalker


                  libertarian?!

                  Where'd that come from?
                  Come on, Kuci, only dirty liberatarians talk about beaver dams when it comes to morality.

                  -Drachasor
                  "If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for her prescription and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandmother. If there's an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties. It's that fundamental belief -- I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper -- that makes this country work." - Barack Obama

                  Comment

                  • #84
                    Originally posted by Kidicious
                    The significance is that the rulers have more power.
                    Irrelevent. They are part of society. Just because society may have a morality that puts different constraints and obligations on different people (for example, men and women, or adults and children) doesn't mean that those people's morals are part of societies from the view of natural selection.

                    Comment

                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Wycoff


                      No, that analogy doesn't make sense. I'd say a tiger's jumping ability is innate. I'd say that its innate to human nature to want to possess things. The applications of those traits differ through situations.
                      It's innate to human nature to want to possess trinkets. Not 'things'.

                      What does the Human appendix do?
                      It's a left-over remnant that can be handily explained by evolutionary theories. I never said that societies don't have remnants lying about. They do.

                      But societies don't follow the rules of evolution. Not only do they have now-useless social structures and customs, but they also have stuff which was NEVER useful. Like ballet. Or people who collect Barbie dolls. Or the belief that vitamin C cures colds.

                      Comment

                      • #86
                        but they also have stuff which was NEVER useful. Like ballet. Or people who collect Barbie dolls. Or the belief that vitamin C cures colds.


                        A person who collects Barbie dolls has more meaning in life and therefore is less likely to blow things up.
                        "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master" - Commissioner Pravin Lal.

                        Comment

                        • #87
                          Good post Wycoff near the bottom on page 1

                          Actually, I believe Daniel Quinn's theory on the fall from grace. Humans lived within the ecological system just like any other organism. Then, they ate the apple that made them like God. They became aware of the nakedness, etc. This represents them discovering that if they become sedentary agrarians, they can step out of the system and instead control it. In essence, they were becoming God by doing this. This is what eating that apple was.
                          Eating the apple was sexual - procreation. That's why they knew they were naked and wore fig leaves. The "Serpent" harkens back to the Sumerian god, Ea or Enki, who was responsible for our creation. Even in the Bible it is the Serpent who is responsible for Adam and Eve having children, not God. He was mad because they had sex and conceived. He didn't want his Garden being over run with humans...

                          Kid, forget about societies not agreeing on morality. You've already argued rules and morality were imposed on us by rulers so what society says about morality is irrelevant. What is relevant is our common desires. People don't want to be murdered, that is ~universal. Pointing to murderers doesn't refute that. Take any individual who has not assimilated into a culture and attack them to see what happens. They'll try to avoid the attack. That is an instinct we share, a "desire" to live. Existence alone creates a right, a moral claim, to exist.

                          Comment

                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Berzerker
                            People don't want to be murdered, that is ~universal.
                            That doesn't make it a universal moral. People believe that it's moral to kill other people is the right circumstance, but never ok to be murdered themselves. If everyone believed that the same people should never be murdered that would be universal. Believing that different people should be murdered and other people should not be murdered does not make a universal moral.
                            I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
                            - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

                            Comment

                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Sandman
                              But societies don't follow the rules of evolution. Not only do they have now-useless social structures and customs, but they also have stuff which was NEVER useful. Like ballet. Or people who collect Barbie dolls. Or the belief that vitamin C cures colds.
                              Of course they follow the rules of evolution (natural selection)! What else would they follow?

                              Comment

                              • #90
                                You're so silly Kuci.
                                I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
                                - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 14 template Next
                                Working...
                                X