On 8/30/2012 2:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
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
Hi Craig,
Umm, ever hear of the concept of "Heaven"? It sounds very much like
a "a future society with a perfect anything or that morals were
unnecessary".
--
Onward!
Stephen
http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
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.
