RE: What would be the harm?
November 30, 2018 at 4:02 pm
(This post was last modified: November 30, 2018 at 4:04 pm by bennyboy.)
If we transcend them, it must be because it is in our nature to do so. A common spiritual theme is the struggle between the animal and the angel in us. But we seem to be in agreement-- with no feelings or motivations, what would cause us to eat, let alone arrive at moral positions upon which to act?
That is, pretty much, why I defined morality in that previous thread as intrinsically subjective: because those motivations are experienced as feelings-- though I should emphasize here the caveat that for that argument, it must be taken as given that a real moral agency exists, i.e. that someone HAS feelings, rather than just being them.
That is, pretty much, why I defined morality in that previous thread as intrinsically subjective: because those motivations are experienced as feelings-- though I should emphasize here the caveat that for that argument, it must be taken as given that a real moral agency exists, i.e. that someone HAS feelings, rather than just being them.
