(March 11, 2011 at 5:50 am)lilphil1989 Wrote: With morality, there is NO independent reality against which to test, as you yourself agree in the below quote. Therefore the "moral model" which you are talking about and "real" morality are one and the same thing.
(March 10, 2011 at 8:38 pm)corndog36 Wrote: No. Morality is a product of the human mind. (unless we start talking about hypothetical aliens again.)
Ok, a few things you said earlier seemed to impy that; I just wanted to make sure I wasn't arguing against a strawman (which I would have been!). Thanks for clearing that up.
The abstract nature of morality is the sticky bit. But, I don't think it is necessarily subjective. If we can agree on a definition of moral, we should be able to come up with a moral model that can be tested by applying it to real life moral questions, like murder, prohibition, protesting at funerals, etc.
The applicable definition of "moral", I believe, is: Doing what is right, just or fair. (I'm open to other interpretations.)
Now I have to come up with a 'moral model' based on my definition. I think Thomas Jefferson was onto something with "All men are created equal" (substitute 'human beings' for 'men' obviously) It seems to me that, "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", is on target as well.
So would the fundamental principle of morality be; "All human beings have the right to peacefully co-exist"?
If so, can we devise a moral code, a system of rules, that allows us to apply that principle to every conceivable moral question?
