RE: In Defense of a Non-Natural Moral Order
August 22, 2019 at 1:29 pm
(This post was last modified: August 22, 2019 at 1:56 pm by John 6IX Breezy.)
(August 22, 2019 at 11:23 am)DLJ Wrote: [quote='Acrobat' pid='1928336' dateline='1566482484']
/quote]
Do you want the long answer or the short answer?
The short version is the definition of morality:
An evolved, human governance / continuity management system.
This system is an evolved extension (in the cognitive domain) of the pre-human immune system, endocrine and limbic system architecture and requires an ethical baseline (requiring memory), emotion-based thresholds, event-detection (e.g. deception detectors; a conscience) and reasoning (hence consciousness). It is enabled / influenced by chemical inhibitors and inducers and social constraints and drivers.
A longer answer would include the interaction of the individual and the environment. It's the latter that gives the illusion of 'objective'.
If you want a complete answer, it would involve algorithms (how we get from sense data to ethics) and a tentative map of the above mentioned 'ethical baseline', which hints at an explanation for transcendence, holocausts etc. Lemme know if you're up for that level of detail.
I don't know if Acrobat is interested in hearing the long answer, but I am. I would like clarification because it isn't very clear to me what you're trying to describe. You seem to be describing a basic human brain structure (with the addition of the immune system which I'm curious to know the role it plays). But everything else, cognition, emotion, consciousness, memory, is not exclusive to morality.
I personally would like you to expound on your statement a little more.