Let's say we evolved from Lions and eventually became a sentient form of Lions.

And suppose the instinct to kill children of new wife came about when marrying. Suppose in this scenario, the instinct to fight one another is gone, but the instinct to kill the children of a divorced or widow new wife, was so strong, it would be very hard to control rage levels of the male looking at the children and very hard to avoid the instinct to kill the children.


The morality framework we work with as Lion Setient species in this possible scenario, can it be called "morality" and can we be called compassionate or empathetic if aside from that, we act with mostly morals we are use to now as humans?


I will form an argument out of this soon so think about responses.

The moral code of the lion people would be morality in the sense of a moral code but it wouldn't be morality in the sense of actually moral. Morality is on a spectrum, and any society can have a moral code but the fact that some societies and some individuals and some actions are more moral than others is what makes morality objective in the first place. There is a right and wrong answer to moral questions and killing your children isn't moral regardless of what society, individual or, indeed, species, thinks it is.

Are Male Lions immoral for killing children of the new group?

Yeah that would be the basis of our morality. It would have to be rationalised for the betterment of society but that's not too hard to imagine. People would argue that children need to be raised in a nuclear family by the biological father. Mothers would also be instilled with the moral principles of being loyal otherwise you risk losing your children.

If we evolved from rats then mothers would eat their children in times of scarcity. Lost your job? Eat your baby. Or if we evolved from dogs then the pack would take priority over the individual.

---

(May 28, 2018 at 5:05 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Are Male Lions immoral for killing children of the new group?

By who's standards?

Technically we did but you have to go back 80-100m years to find the remote common ancestor.

(May 28, 2018 at 5:05 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Are Male Lions immoral for killing children of the new group?

Actual lions?

I'd say it's morally bad but I wouldn't say that they were moral agents. If "ought" implies "can" then it makes no sense to say that they ought to do otherwise if they cannot. However, that doesn't mean that it isn't objectively bad that it happens.

There's morality in the sense of moral responsibility and there's morality in the broader axiological sense. There's right and wrong responsible action on the one hand and then there's good and bad consequences on the other.

(May 28, 2018 at 5:07 pm)Mathilda Wrote: Yeah that would be the basis of our morality. It would have to be rationalised for the betterment of society but that's not too hard to imagine. People would argue that children need to be raised in a nuclear family by the biological father. Mothers would also be instilled with the moral principles of being loyal otherwise you risk losing your children.

If we evolved from rats then mothers would eat their children in times of scarcity. Lost your job? Eat your baby. Or if we evolved from dogs then the pack would take priority over the individual.

---

(May 28, 2018 at 5:05 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Are Male Lions immoral for killing children of the new group?

By who's standards?

We only have one sentient species we supposedly are only aware of.

What happens if we as a species begin to meet in space a group of humans who evolved from apes, and they begin to dictate to us it's wrong to kill children when divorced and we end up in a big war.

My question to that, is morality the source of conflict in this case or the way to avoid conflict.

If morality that we dispute about is supposed to direct us on how to act, but we don't know really objectively what set of morals to follow, and we by impulse believe in our tribe/country leaders and their morality by instinct, same as the Lions cannot really avoid by instinct to kill their children of new Lion wife,   can we condemn war from morality or is inevitable that we fight one another believing our tribe/religion/country morals are better.

If human instinct was to defend their tribe and prefer it be they right or wrong, and that was a survival mechanism, is it a wrong to support a country that is not right in their stance in  a war?

(May 28, 2018 at 5:18 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:

(May 28, 2018 at 5:07 pm)Mathilda Wrote: Yeah that would be the basis of our morality. It would have to be rationalised for the betterment of society but that's not too hard to imagine. People would argue that children need to be raised in a nuclear family by the biological father. Mothers would also be instilled with the moral principles of being loyal otherwise you risk losing your children.

If we evolved from rats then mothers would eat their children in times of scarcity. Lost your job? Eat your baby. Or if we evolved from dogs then the pack would take priority over the individual.

---

By who's standards?

We only have one sentient species we supposedly are only aware of.

What happens if we as a species begin to meet in space a group of humans who evolved from apes, and they begin to dictate to us it's wrong to kill children when divorced and we end up in a big war.

My question to that, is morality the source of conflict in this case or the way to avoid conflict.

If morality that we dispute about is supposed to direct us on how to act, but we don't know really objectively what set of morals to follow, and we by impulse believe in our tribe/country leaders and their morality by instinct, same as the Lions cannot really avoid by instinct to kill their children of new Lion wife,   can we condemn war from morality or is inevitable that we fight one another believing our tribe/religion/country morals are better.

If human instinct was to defend their tribe and prefer it be they right or wrong, and that was a survival mechanism, is it a wrong to support a country that is not right in their stance in  a war?

Planet of the Apes vs. The Lion King! Who would win?

Duh. Planet of the Apes. The lions in The Lion King aren't even three dimensional.

(May 28, 2018 at 7:42 pm)Edwardo Piet Wrote: Duh. Planet of the Apes. The lions in The Lion King aren't even three dimensional.

Bipedalism and opposable thumbs are also an asset!