Subject:
|
Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:46:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
919 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
> > > Don't all morally conscious creatures pass moral judgement?
> >
> > By doing so we infer our morals on them - rather conceited I think.
I'm not sure what infering our morals on them really means, but I do agree that
we are anthropocentric in our judgement of other critters. But I'm not sure a)
that this is a bad thing, or b) that it is possible to get away from. How
would we do it?
> Ah, so all morality is conceited? If not, please clarify.
Actually, I would have thought you agreed with this point. It kind of seems
implicit in the stance that morals are socially derived. Since they are
decided on by pockets of people, different pockets of people have different
moral standards. Since all morally conscious creatures pass moral
judgement, based on their local norms, they are by nature applying their own
standards to the behavior of others who are not ruled by the same set of moral
norms. If feeling justified to do that is not conceit, then what is?
All of that said, I'm not agreeing with Scott's implication that this is a bad
thing. I'm certainly conceited that way...but that's OK, because I'm right!
(Don't we all think that?)
> > > If not, then what's the point (read use) of
> > > having a moral judgement? If so, then what standard can we judge against
> > > except our own?
> >
> > The morals of the societies we live in - not our individual morals.
>
> Ah. So judging by the moral standards of society, we arrive at a morality
> which is not conceited?
No, it is macro-conceited. As Americans, we judge cultures all over the world
against our own standards. It is identical to the kind of conceit that I might
express when judging you by my personal standards. There is no escaping this
loop.
> In order to avoid conceit we must judge according to
> that which others believe, and not ourselves, at least not solely?
Impossible.
> To what
> extent are we a member of that society? To what extent are certain others?
> Can we pass judgement on society? How about the abscence of society? Whose
> society?
Well, you're the moral socialist...you tell us. :-)
But actually, how do those questions affect morality being a social construct?
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
244 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
