RE: List of reasons to believe God exists?
December 5, 2017 at 5:58 pm
(This post was last modified: December 5, 2017 at 6:16 pm by henryp.)
(December 5, 2017 at 4:50 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:In america in 2017, most people would say yes. In America in 1840 if the woman is black? If you're a viking, and the woman is the village you just overran? Rape and pillage and whatnot.(December 5, 2017 at 1:59 pm)wallym Wrote: You get mad because you care about something, and someone hurt the something you care about. By hurting someone you care about, they are hurting you. So you get angry. That seems rational to me.
Rationally, you may also know there's no reason for them to care about hurting you, but that doesn't mean you still shouldn't have a strong dislike for people and things that hurt you. Where and how you direct those emotions may vary on the logical scale, but it's an emotional response, so you'd expect that?
I see what you are saying. Though not sure that a purely emotional response can ever be called rational, but it does make sense.
I suppose the question would then be, is it justifiable to feel extreme anger towards a rapist if it's merely my opinion that rape is immoral? I still think mostly everyone would answer yes, even those who say morality is subjective. They still act as though it isnt.
It seems more like the opinion depends on societal norms and context than anything else. Hell, there was a movie in the 80's where the nerd tricks a girl to have sex with him thinking he's her boyfriend, and he was the hero of the story. 16 Candles, they play a fucking Gong every time Long Duck Dong shows up on screen. 50 years ago, if I wanted to slap around my wife, that'd be fine.
I think you mistake how domesticated we sort of are in America in 2017 and missapply that to our 200,000 year history on the planet.
(December 5, 2017 at 5:50 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Wally, I have a question. What is your opinion on what humanity's moral standards should be based on? Or do you think there shouldn't be any standards? I am curious to hear your personal philosophy on morals and how you think they should be applied, what they should be based on, etc.
I like a practical approach which I don't consider morality. It's just laws. We make some rules to protect our interests. I don't want anyone I care about raped (not that I am pro anyone getting raped). You don't want anyone raped. Blammo, we all agree. Rapes against the law, and we create a deterrent (jail or worse) to keep people from doing it. That methodology takes care of a lot of the easy stuff.
As for overall, it's a tricky business trying to balance my direct personal interests with indirect personal interests, like keeping people from revolting and taking all my stuff. I've got a bum ankle, and Thunderdome style living wouldn't work out well for me.