I disagree. Morality is not a personal decision but a communal one and is not innate but taught by the family and society. Morals are loose enough to change according to current trends and therefore not fixed- they are a cousin to "situation ethics".
On Mar 15, 6:31 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > I think that is wrong mate. Morality is no more than ones personal > definition of what is right and what is wrong. > > On 14 Mar, 06:27, fiddler <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > And no: morals are not based on reason, ethics are based on reason. > > Morals are the "spiritual " measure of right and wrong and ethics are > > the intellectual/societal force that makes living in groups possible. > > > Ethics are what we get when we apply logic and concern for others to > > ourselves. Morals come from illiterate bronze and iron age paedophiles > > and misogynists in silly little collections of quaint tribal > > stories. > > > On Mar 13, 4:32 pm, Staples <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Fiddler: > > > > "Morals are far too fluid...to be a guide in any dilemma; > > > reason...provides the ability to make decisions." > > > > Assuming you actually meant this, you implied that: > > > > 1. Morals are not a constant. > > > 2. Morals are not based on reason. > > > > How could anyone live with a system of morality like that - one > > > divorced from rationality and is "fluid", e.g., changes from day to > > > day - on what basis? Irrationality? I suppose so.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" 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/minds-eye?hl=en.
