My views on objective morality
March 2, 2016 at 12:24 pm
(This post was last modified: March 2, 2016 at 12:33 pm by LadyForCamus.)
(March 1, 2016 at 10:40 pm)bennyboy Wrote: [quote='LadyForCamus' pid='1216110' dateline='1456879780']
Hmm...okay, I see your point. So, we could consider each individual's genetically expressed tendencies as objective for that specific person?
Quote:There are certain behaviors that are clearly mediated by instinct and for the most part are uniform across culture and time. A mother not taking care of her baby, for example, would be seen as immoral in probably every culture-- or it would be a short-lived culture, indeed. Even though some mothers in fact do not take care of babies, or some cultures have cases in which particular babies are discarded cruelly, I'd say that child-rearing rules might be said to represent an objective morality.
Sure, but I think when we are talking about norms across entire cultures that differ significantly from one another (forgive my bumpy language I have no formal education in sociology [emoji15]) like the female infanticide which was common practice in China (though never legally sanctioned as I understand), it's a lot harder to justify a case for an over-reaching objective morality.
I mean, the Chinese justified their baby-killing through Buddhism and the idea of reincarnation the same way Christians use original sin and eternal life to justify other terrible acts.
We still end up stuck with the problem of cross-cultural norms that don't agree.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.
