>
> Are you now amending this to say that "In my opinion, those that pound
> their chest and wave their hat while proclaiming themselves morally
> superior, are, by definition, not."?
I think what needs to be established is a concerete definition of
moral superiority.
If I were to define moral superiority as a greater ability to
distinguish between what is right, and what is wrong, than wouldn't
a morally superior person be exactly the person best suited to
judge his own moral superiority?
For example, let's look at that lasting icon of the west, Jesus.
(Note: I'm agnostic, I'm just doing this as an example). Now, no
matter what you think of Christianity or religion as a whole, I think
we could all agree that Jesus was a fairly moral guy. Likewise, he
did not become the most influential figure in western civilization just
by sitting around Nazareth, claiming that he couldn't possibly be
more moral than (Insert immoral persona here).
Of course.....I could be wrong
-Brian
