RE: Evolution of morality
March 10, 2011 at 6:10 pm
(This post was last modified: March 10, 2011 at 6:15 pm by lilphil1989.)
corndog36 Wrote:Is that subjective or objective?
It's objective. Although I would also argue that it is impossible, in that "fundamental principles of right and wrong" do not exist.
corndog36 Wrote:I think it is possible to arrive at objective moral conclusions, if your moral model is sound.
But the only way to test your "moral model" would be to compare it to reality. But there's no reality with which to compare since the model and the thing you're using it to describe are not distinct.
Consider two people, or two species who have developed different, contradicting moral codes. How do you judge which one is better?
The only way to judge one is in terms of the other, as there is no external "yardstick" by which to measure both.
EDIT:
Quote:Human understanding of morality evolves, not morality itself. Morality is based on the fundamental principles of right and wrong, which never change.
This implies that morality exists independently of human beings or any other species with a moral code.
You are then left with the unenviable task of explaining its origin.
Galileo was a man of science oppressed by the irrational and superstitious. Today, he is used by the irrational and superstitious who claim they are being oppressed by science - Mark Crislip
