(September 3, 2013 at 4:26 pm)genkaus Wrote:(September 3, 2013 at 4:12 pm)Chas Wrote: Please climb down off of your high horse, it's hard to hear you from there.
Is it harder to read as well?
(September 3, 2013 at 4:12 pm)Chas Wrote: You are claiming a definition of morality and others disagree with your definition. Your claim to being right does not make you right.
Obviously. Being right makes me right.
Wikipedia Wrote:Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior") is the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are "good" (or right) and those that are "bad" (or wrong).
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/morality-definition/ Wrote:The term “morality” can be used either
1. descriptively to refer to some codes of conduct put forward by a society or,
a. some other group, such as a religion, or
b. accepted by an individual for her own behavior or
2. normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons.
(September 3, 2013 at 4:12 pm)Chas Wrote: Please define the basis on which one determines how one should live absent other people. What is the basis for choice?
That's a part of a larger discussion that I won't engage in unless the premise of that discussion is agreed upon. I'm not going to lay down the details of how one should live only for you to say in the end "but that's not what morality is".
The first (preferred) definition you quote shows morality is defined in relation to other people. The second refers to specified conditions.
I am asking you to specify your conditions.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.