(March 12, 2011 at 5:36 am)lilphil1989 Wrote:(March 11, 2011 at 4:45 pm)corndog36 Wrote: Rather than "moral code" I should have said "code of conduct", to avoid confusion. The code of conduct would be based on the fundamental principle. But the question for me is; is it possible to identify a fundamental principle of morality? I'm not yet convinced that it is not.
You're playing semantic games now.
I'm trying not to. A code of conduct is, basically, a set of rules we choose to live by. An example would be; "I will not commit murder". Even if it were legal, I wouldn't do it because I believe it is immoral. In order to make that judgment I need an underlying principle. Why is it immoral to commit murder? I think we generally do this intuitively, without consciously identifying the principle. If I can identify a single principle that informs all of my moral decisions, that would be my fundamental principle of morality. If everyone agreed on a single principle, (which they clearly do not), that would be a universal principle of morality.
Quote:Using my earlier example: "All human beings have the right to peacefully co-exist," as a starting point. Can anyone refute that that is a (or possibly "the") fundamental principle of morality?
Quote:Suppose I were to add a corollary:
"All humans beings have the right to peacefully co-exist, except those with green eyes, who are inferior, and should be subjugated at every oppurtunity"
How could you refute that without reference to your own ideas of morality?
You can't, and that's the whole point.
Possibly. But I would need clarification on one point; Are you willing to stipulate to my definition of the word "moral"? If so, I can say that your corollary is unfair, therefore unjust, therefore immoral by definition. If you are not willing to stipulate, then my definition is just my "idea" of morality and my argument is clearly circular. If we cannot define the word "moral", then any discussion of morality becomes an exercise in mental masturbation.
