(November 26, 2013 at 9:28 pm)FiniteImmortal Wrote: So is this Duty you speak of based on situational ethics, or is it universally recognized that a baby ough be resued? If it is universal, would you not call that a moral law? If it is situational, I hope you have a clear head and can weigh all the pros and cons fairly when you see a distressed baby. 'Duty' can be no other way than to be umbilically connected to a moral law.
Well, it's certainly not universally recognised that a baby ought to be rescued. Moreover, it's not even recognised within the texts of the major religions. Quite the opposite in many cases. This line of reasoning is spurious at best. All ethics are based on the prevailing circumstances.
Regarding love being "just" a construct of our minds without a belief in god, it disregards the fact that our minds are very real. Take away our minds and we lose the ability to do... well.... anything. Without your mind, where would your faith in god be? Just because we are gaining a more complete understanding of how our brains work, does not make thoughts and feelings any less real. It only goes to make them more real and by virtue of this, more significant.
Is a work of art any less inspiring when you know how it was made?
