Posted by frankd on October 28, 19100 at 10:46:40:
In Reply to: and what if moral doesn't exist? posted by MONICA on May 29, 1999 at 05:35:34:
: what if we say that morals do not exist? it is a scarry thought maybe..where would we be without values and restraints that stop us from hurting each other? i guess i am too existentialist and nietszcheschian to accept a suffocating and stringent moral...in my opinion, if we find ourselves, if we take coscience of our word and reality, then we can become overman. then, our evolution having reached the peak, we would not need rules anymore, because a fearless and determinate man doesn't need to defend himself..as to say that he'd be a constructor...
: not a destroyer. yet, to answer your question, if we were to apply values, and sometimes i guess we should, i would say that they must be subjective. one would maybe say that there are some universal values that shoul hold for everyone..i do agree..i don't want to deny that...but only after our complete evolution would we be able to understand and respect them...
: standards and stereotypes are killing us, are killing our individuality...the only thing that makes us supermen...
This is my first time here and I'm not sure how to follow up. Forgive me if this is the incorrect way.
I wanted to comment on this because I am taking ethics and the class has been dealing with the problem of an absolute basis for right and wrong. None of us wants to take seriously a tranendental explanation invoking God or Plato's Forms or the like. On the other hand, we feel that each one of us has an inherent feel for the more extreme instances of "wrong." Certainly genocide is always wrong, no matter where, no matter when. It seems as though we all have some seed of goodness (which may not flourish in all of us) and that seed tells us when we are doing grevious harm. Even murderers generally know that what they are doing is wrong.
How does humanity become more just and therefore more moral? It seems as though we gradually agree on certain standards. That is, we sort of adopt a social contract which, little by little over the centuries, results in more actions becoming unacceptable. Just about every society in the world considers slavery wrong. The attempt by Western nations to stop the killing in Kosovo was done because there was a sense that genocide is wrong and has to be stopped. It wasn't that long ago that both slavery and genocide occurred with almost no reaction from the world at large.
Currently, we dispute with China as to whether certain actions are "wrong." I believe that gradually, over many years, some of China's policies will become more "humane" and the social contract will contain a longer list of actions that we agree are wrong. Perhaps, China will convince the West that some of our policies can use some modification. If China and the West agree, it is likely that most other governments will fall into line and also become more humane.
This doesn't quite answer the personal moral questions, but, if you realize that as a human being you have an inherent sense of right and wrong, you can reach inside and use that to guide your actions. Sometimes you need to think about it a little because moral choices are ofter more gray vs gray rather than black and white. But even if find later that your choice was the wrong one, the fact that you tried to think it through means that the next time you will be better at it. Why bother? The reward comes when you look at that person in the mirror and realize that you are looking at a basically decent human being.
READ THE GREAT BOOKS
TERM PAPERS, RESEARCH PAPERS, ESSAYS
DR. ELLIOT'S NORTH AMERICAN GREAT BOOKS TOUR--COMING TO A BOOK
STORE NEAR YOU
[Shakespeare Forums]
[Bible Forums]