Subject:
|
Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 31 Dec 1999 14:18:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1367 times
|
| |
|
|
On Fri, 31 Dec 1999 07:03:32 GMT, John Neal <johnneal@uswest.net>
wrote:
> I like a more objective definition because I hate the trend towards relativism I
> think we are experiencing these days. If a sociopath considers killing others
> good, is it? But if good is objective, from who's perspective? God, who is by
> definition, perfect, and therefore the perfect judge of good and evil. Discerning
> God's perspective of good is another question, but at least the search for good
> extends beyond our mortal and imperfect selves.
Good isn't objective. What we, society as a whole, consider to be
"good" is both up for debate in certain areas (I'm specifically _not_
going to mention ab*rti*n here), and it is no more valid than the
ideas of other societies, other than possibly by virtue of having
survived longer (and objective moralists aren't generally too keen on
defining objective good in terms of Darwinism - are you?).
The Spartans made a habit of leaving unwanted babies in the mountains,
alive, to be torn apart by the wolves. They had a short but highly
successful reign in the first millennium BC. The Romans made a habit
of slavery, and their empire lasted a thousand years. The Vikings made
a habit of making blood eagles out of their enemies: cutting open the
chest, spreading the ribs, and spreading out the guts, lungs, and
heart on the ground beside them. While they were still alive. They
were very successful for a few hundred years. The Borgias made a habit
of political intrigue (and assassinations), which made Venice the most
powerful city in the western world for a hundred years+. The United
States made a habit of racial segregration until, historically
speaking, yesterday, and it made them the most powerful nation on the
planet. Until the Y2K bug killed it off, of course.
All of these societies/people considered what they did to be "good".
Are you saying they were all wrong, all the time, but _we_ are
suddenly right?
I realise that this is not a particularly _nice_ thing to say, but
then, the real world isn't nice.
Jasper
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
188 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
|
|
|
|
