(May 8, 2016 at 4:49 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:(May 8, 2016 at 3:55 pm)Excited Penguin Wrote: I see no problem reconciling the two, you're the one questioning it, so maybe you should come up with a reason why I couldn't.
See the post immediately above.
Boru
The side of the road to drive on is moral because it's enforced by an authority for your own safety. Society functions because of an order imposed on it, a moral order that tells you how to behave yourself. I don't see the point in pretending like it doesn't exist or that it's evil. It's highly unlikely that a moral system arising out of a real, functioning democratic society would legally condone child rape. That would have to mean the majority of people would have to wish to become child molesters, wouldn't care for their children or simply remain passive in face of it all. Even if that did happen, it would be so detrimental as to demolish our future. You can't exactly keep the world spinning if virtually all future adults are traumatised and worse. And that is why it wouldn't be moral. It would be bad both for the individual and for the group. That's the opposite of a moral outcome.
Objective morality is what is best for people. And I know that's an open question, but it's not an impossible one. We're constantly making progress, everyone knows this, you'd have me believe we don't and never have. Somehow the world is completely amoral and we just happen to be living the comfortable lives we are because of a series of fortunate coincidences. Can you see how completely absurd such a view is?
How about you stop being silly and arguing for argument's sake, 'cause I'm pretty tired of it.
