Jonathan M Poppele wrote:
|> Someone could say it is also quite "natural" for humans to kill each
|> other.
|
|Some could, but I have no idea what their basis would be.
Been doing it for years. Even in cave folk days (see the recent Science
News).
|I have always wondered how anyone could come up with a moral foundation
|that was not based on nature. To me, to do so is the epitome of the
|arrogance of humanism. Exactly the sort of ideas that got us into trouble
|in the first place.
Moral foundation can be based on "love of nature" for example, but not
what we see in nature. Because in nature there is siblicide,
cannibalism, incest, murder, cheating, stealing, etc. In other words
ANYTHING and EVERYTHING that someone wants to do can be justified using
nature as an example (haven't I heard or said this already? :-).
|more naive accounts in my life. If you want to have a deep understanding of
|the workings of nature, of the cycles of life and death, study Native
|American philosophy and animal stories, then read Gaia by James Lovelock.
For what it's worth, I am an ecologist, and I walk around in the woods a
lot studying nature.
|Among other things, this study will help you realize that death is not
|the worst thing that can happen to a living thing: disrespect is. After
Disrespect is the worst thing that can happen? Hmm, I think I would not
mind being disrespected by a few people and live a long life, than to die
today...
|all, we all die. Our plant and animal sisters and brothers, even the
|rocks. But none of us need to suffer disrespect during our time here in
|the physical world.
Rocks die? Rocks prefer respect to life? Gee, gonna have to think on
that one.
|Yes. Of course you no doubt disagree. This is most likely because we
Well, what are they? Cruelty free and respectful ways to kill, I mean.
|have very different ideas of what cruelty and respect are. I take my
|views from nature, not from an ivory tower philosophy class.
Where did the ivory tower come into this? Both cruelty and respect are
human terms. I've never discussed respect and cruelty with the birds and
hte bees, but I sure have watched animals treat each other with cruelty
and disrespect, causing pain, mutilation, and sometimes they don't even
have enough respect to kill the maimed animal! I have no problems, moral
or otherwise, with what animals do to each other. We are talking moral
issues, and only humans are moral agents (at least until other animals or
plants tell us about their morality in no uncertain terms). Oh, by the
way, I take my views from nature too, but not my morality. My morality
comes from my wish to keep and cherish a beautiful nature all over the
world.
Now, out of curiosity, is this kind of a discussion a "male thing" or do
women out there have any problems with this issue?
Jim
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Feb 4 12:16:08 MST 1995
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 1995 14:21:12 -0500 (EST)
From: Jayne S Docherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Brian A. Luke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: global responsibility
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sat, 4 Feb 1995, Brian A. Luke wrote:
> Are you suggesting that philosophy classes are not part of nature?
> What about the of-the-earth chalk I use? :)
>
> Seriously, how does it work to "take your views from nature"?
There is a very long tradition in philosophy and theology of looking to
the "natural order" for some form of direction in the formulation of our
moral and ethical principles. The interesting question is whether we
actually "perceive" the "natural order" or whether we read into nature
that which we already believe to be there. For example, was it a
coincidence that Darwin -- living at a time when the industrial
revolution was creating a "dog-eat-dog" social order in place of more
communitarian agrarian communities -- found nature to "red in tooth and
claw"? Which came first? I suspect the answer is very complex and that
it is not an either/or situation. It is all tied to the way we make
"cognitive maps" of the world (i.e., formulate our beliefs about what is
out there, how it is and should be ordered, and what value it has). We
will be much further along the road to figuring out a new way to live in
relation to the planet if we understand the ways that we both shape and
are shaped by "reality"....
Jayne
