On Thursday, August 30, 2012 2:01:45 PM UTC-4, Alberto G.Corona wrote: > > I think that there are many tries to separate moral from ethics: > indiividual versus social, innate versus cultural, emotional versus > rational etc. The whole point is to obviate the m*** world as much as we > can, under the impression that moral is subjective and not objetive, or > more precisely that there is no moral that can be objective. An there is > such crap as the separation of facts and values (as if values (and in > particular universal values) where not social facts). > > Well, this is a more effect of positivism which is deeply flawed in > theoretical and practical terms. It is a consequence also of modern > gnosticism, called progressivism of which positivism is one of the phases, > that believes possible in a certain future a society with a > perfect harmony of individual desires and social needs, making moral > unnecessary. >
I have never heard anyone who expresses progressive, liberal, or left wing opinions state that they believe in a future society with a perfect anything or that morals were unnecessary. Craig -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/yrAKTPjoVJcJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
