Subject:
|
Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 29 Sep 1999 18:33:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1200 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Brown writes:
> Do you think morality is internal (only I can determine if I am moral), or
> external (you can determine if I am moral)?
Reading some of your posts, I see that you carefully differentiate self-defined
"morals" and socially defined "ethics."
The problem I have with this dichotomy is that it is impotent (no "r") to avoid
imposing one's own morality on others. If I have developed my own moral
principles, or fully accepted an ethical code that I have been taught, then I
believe it to be right and of universal value. I may not want to see it
legislated, but I think the world would be a better place if everyone followed
my moral system. I don't see how moral beliefs could lead to anything but
ethical imperialism. This ongoing discussion is an example. We all think we've
got some good ideas about morality, so we're trying to persuade others to see
things our way. Nothing wrong with that. I'm just pointing out that morality is
not purely an internal thing. People develop their own moral system based on
experience, teachings, and thought, and then project it onto others.
So all that "don't judge people" stuff is just a cozy fiction.
We all judge people, because that's how a society avoids fragmentation. We may
argue about whether a sociopath behaves with a sense of morality, immorality,
or
amorality, but we still take steps to arrest his actions.
If you know someone who routinely transgresses your personal moral code, you
may
not verbally condemn them to a thousand hells of eternal torment, but you'll
probably avoid their company and have a low opinion of them. Guess what? That's
"judging people."
A problem with leaving self-defined moral codes unchallenged is that some
people
tend to justify their actions by developing moralities of convenience (e.g. "if
someone leaves their bike unlocked, then they deserve to have it stolen, and I
am justified in stealing it."). Flimsy moral concepts such as these might not
stand up to testing, but if we don't "judge" people or project our own
morality,
how can we help people to collapse superficial, self-serving pseudo-morals?
> If external, then who defines morality?
I don't believe in an objective morality (yup, I'm an atheist) beyond the basic
biological instincts for survival, procreation, and defense of the young.
However, I do think that pairing those urges with a social lifestyle logically
yields a lot of our basic ethical/moral/legal codes. But like many others, I
try
to follow a moral/ethical code that goes beyond genetic self-interest. Such a
subjective, altruistic morality has been advocated by great religious figures
from across time and geography. It may be a key for a fulfilling life, or a
stable, just society; but I don't think it necessitates ideas of divine decree.
In another post, you asked whether a person behaves immorally when he refrains
from giving what he can to help those in greater need. I would hesitantly argue
YES, that when affluence and bitter want coexist, the affluent have an ethical
responsibility to help those in need. This reflects poorly on me, since I can
afford to give more to charity than the negligible amount that I actually do.
Hell, we could all give up our common hobby and use the money to help save
lives
instead. Why don't I? I don't really know. But it makes me a less righteous
person than I might like to be.
But I just found out about a great site,
http://www.thehungersite.com/
"Visitors to the site are invited to donate a serving of food by clicking on a
button. The donations are paid for by corporate sponsors."
This way, I can support charity without sacrifice or inconvenience. It isn't
much, and I don't feel it completely satisfies the ethical responsibility I
described above, but it's still a great thing. I encourage everyone to use the
site and tell their friends about it.
Josh Spaulding
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance
|
| (...) Of course people develop their moral code. But no two people are going to have the same code, which means that no one individual can know wether someone else is acting morally. (I took some leaps of logic there) (...) I do not claim to not (...) (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
81 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- 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
|
|
|
|
