(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?
God thinks it's fun to confuse primates. Larsen's God!
