Comments on: Thoughts on Morality http://collapsingwaves.wordpress.com/2008/08/15/thoughts-on-morality/ Sat, 01 Nov 2008 18:10:02 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: cl http://collapsingwaves.wordpress.com/2008/08/15/thoughts-on-morality/#comment-30 cl Tue, 23 Sep 2008 18:33:48 +0000 http://collapsingwaves.wordpress.com/?p=24#comment-30 Of curiosity - you say, "Morality can lead to good..." If morality is subjective, as you seem to posit in agreement with Hume, from where do you define 'good?' Isn't 'good' just another one of those relative terms we ascribe to conditions of pleasantry? To some people, bricks of crack cocaine and a thick gun stash is good. Under the morality that you propose and/or advocate, at what point does an act become 'bad'?? In this vein, I invite you to answer the following, not as test or challenge or trick question, but so I might better understand one atheist's interpretation of morality: <a href="http://thewarfareismental.typepad.com/the_warfare_is_mental/2008/09/a-public-challe.html" rel="nofollow">Is It Wrong For Me To Kill A Flea?</a> Of curiosity – you say, “Morality can lead to good…”

If morality is subjective, as you seem to posit in agreement with Hume, from where do you define ‘good?’ Isn’t ‘good’ just another one of those relative terms we ascribe to conditions of pleasantry? To some people, bricks of crack cocaine and a thick gun stash is good.

Under the morality that you propose and/or advocate, at what point does an act become ‘bad’??

In this vein, I invite you to answer the following, not as test or challenge or trick question, but so I might better understand one atheist’s interpretation of morality: Is It Wrong For Me To Kill A Flea?

]]> By: Brad http://collapsingwaves.wordpress.com/2008/08/15/thoughts-on-morality/#comment-7 Brad Mon, 25 Aug 2008 06:31:43 +0000 http://collapsingwaves.wordpress.com/?p=24#comment-7 The philosophy of morality here, I think, has some to borrow from science of the mind. Our attentions are very limited, and that explains why we aren't all experts on politics and economics and so on. It also explains why "A three year old Iraq killed by crossfire doesn’t bother Americans as much as when a three year old here dies in a swimming pool." It has everything to do with consciousness. (Your comment, Scott, reminded me of a <a href="http://uncrediblehallq.net/blog/?p=71" rel="nofollow">post from the Uncredible Hallq</a>, BTW.) The philosophy of morality here, I think, has some to borrow from science of the mind. Our attentions are very limited, and that explains why we aren’t all experts on politics and economics and so on. It also explains why “A three year old Iraq killed by crossfire doesn’t bother Americans as much as when a three year old here dies in a swimming pool.” It has everything to do with consciousness.

(Your comment, Scott, reminded me of a post from the Uncredible Hallq, BTW.)

]]> By: Scott Erb http://collapsingwaves.wordpress.com/2008/08/15/thoughts-on-morality/#comment-5 Scott Erb Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:26:26 +0000 http://collapsingwaves.wordpress.com/?p=24#comment-5 Hume also argued at one point that moral education involved reading novels (today some films might qualify). As you learn to put yourselves in the shoes of others they become more human, and thus you are compelled to see your acts towards others in the same light as acts towards yourself. This doesn't give a clear moral principle, but does suggest that immorality and atrocities are more likely when people abstract others into an entity quite different from themselves (due to race, religion, or simply abstraction). A three year old Iraq killed by crossfire doesn't bother Americans as much as when a three year old here dies in a swimming pool. The Iraqi isn't as real to most people. Hume also argued at one point that moral education involved reading novels (today some films might qualify). As you learn to put yourselves in the shoes of others they become more human, and thus you are compelled to see your acts towards others in the same light as acts towards yourself. This doesn’t give a clear moral principle, but does suggest that immorality and atrocities are more likely when people abstract others into an entity quite different from themselves (due to race, religion, or simply abstraction). A three year old Iraq killed by crossfire doesn’t bother Americans as much as when a three year old here dies in a swimming pool. The Iraqi isn’t as real to most people.

]]>