(October 8, 2009 at 5:59 pm)Arcanus Wrote: [quote='amw79' pid='36619' dateline='1254755519']
You can't realistically call the consequentialism view of moraility "self serving", as its implicit meaning is derived from the consequence of the moral act, not the context or belief system responsible for the act.
This is incomprehensible. No belief system—not even Christianity—can be "responsible for the act" because belief systems don't act! Please reformulate your objection intelligibly.
Mmm. I think pedantry is at play here. Substitute the words "responsible for" for the phrase "held by the committer of".
You know the point I was making (in context). The Christian view of morality has a built-in mechanism, which, as you stated, renders any moral acts commited by a non-christian as worthless. I would suggest that someone looking at this concept critically could see this as a very useful dogma designed to encourage people to 'subscribe' to Christianity or face damnation.
I don't believe the other views of morality you mentioned have a similar self-serving dogma attatched to them.
