RE: Morality
January 22, 2019 at 12:31 pm
(This post was last modified: January 22, 2019 at 12:35 pm by Angrboda.)
(January 20, 2019 at 10:50 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:(January 16, 2019 at 6:36 pm)Acrobat Wrote: I apologize if you took anything I said personally, or as any type of judgement of you as a person.
I don’t know you, but I’m sure you’re a decent dude, I doubt the conclusion that school made you a more moral person, not that you’re not a good person, but that’s okay I won’t push the questions any further.
In my view that’s a pretty weak concept of a good person, an apathetic person, could fit the bill.
Being good in my view is being a person of good character, kind, honest, compassionate, considerate, humble, courageous, etc.. in fact I’d say moral courage is a big one, to stand up for what’s right when needed.
Raising a daughter, i value her being a good person, over being smart. I rather have a good child, a kind and loving one, than a scientific genius.
Why do you think we have different morals now than, say, those we had 2,000 years ago?
Hello? Anybody home?
(January 20, 2019 at 11:55 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:(January 18, 2019 at 12:58 pm)Acrobat Wrote: “It has been hard to find any correlation between moral reasoning and proactive moral behavior, such as helping other people. In fact, in most studies, none has been found.” - Michael Gazzaniga
That's a fascinating quote. Unfortunately it seems to leave open the question of whether moral intuitions are not based upon any reasoning whatsoever, both conscious and unconscious, or whether it's just an expression of the fact that unconscious reasoning about morals is privileged over that of explicit, conscious reasoning. If the latter is true, this doesn't lead to the place you seem to want to go with it.
This could use a response as well. You seem to be suggesting that experience and learning are not effective at shaping or improving one's morals. For the reason given, the Gazzaniga quote doesn't in itself lead to that conclusion. The two things don't even appear particularly related, which would make your whole argument a non sequitur.
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)