Open mindedness is just what the two words imply, a mind that will at least consider the new, and maybe if the new is validated then to encompase it into the belief structure.
I belive that morality exists, that each of us have an understanding of good and evil, if I may term it such, yes. Joel says: 'But suddenly I knew it no more. I was not merely skeptical or agnostic about it; I had come to believe, and do still, that these things are not wrong. But neither are they right; nor are they permissible. The entire set of moral attributions is out the window.' It sure looks to me that he is still applieying a moral lens to his thinking here. Why are these things not permissible? If they are not right, what are they? He goes on then to give the following anology: ' A tribe of people lives on an isolated island. They have no formal governmental institutions of any kind. In particular they have no legislature. Therefore in that society it would make no sense to say that someone had done something “illegal.” But neither would anything be “legal.” The entire set of legal categories would be inapplicable. In just this way I now view moral categories.' What he talks of here is the labels we use to describe right or wrong not being appicable, but that is mere language. Right or wrong, leagel or illigeal, correct or incorrect, accpeted or not accepted, are all differant words to describe morality, which is agian our individual understanding of right or wrong. Would this tribe, fight or let the neigborung tribe steal their crops? Why or why not? If they choose to fight they show clearly that a judgment call has been made. To judge means to weight up against a moral standard. This for me is the winning line though. 'I must accept that other people sometimes have opposed preferences, even when we are agreed on all the relevant facts and are reasoning correctly.' All in all this piece is saying to me that morality is wholey subjective. Our preferances, or our desires are also all about morality, ultimatly. What do I want or what do I need, are both questions governed by the question what is good for me? Huge and liverly, yes that is one way of putting it. Anything mate you want to know about Sikhi, well you only have to ask. On Aug 23, 2:14 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > Maybe open-mindedness is not relativism, Lee. Are morals and ethics > universally recognized and accepted? Are they fixed or subject to > change or tweeking? :-) The pitfall may be when excuses and denial try > to rationalize bad deeds and conduct. Plus- our conscience has been > formed by our family, religion and culture- even wrong thinking, > included. And what about our relations with the "other" and "others"- > where is our responsibilty/duty? Anyway, it's a huge and lively > subject, isn't it? > > I looked up the Sikh religion this weekend and was impressed! > (Wikipedia) I started thinking about Kip- a character in "The English > Patient" (book and movie). > > On Aug 22, 10:36 am, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Cheers for this Rigsy. > > > An iterresting piece, sorta similar to my own stance on moral > > relitivsim. I cn see where he is coming from alas I can not fully > > agree. > > > Morality according to Lee is merely the individual's understanding of > > right or wrong actions. > > > Accordingly then if person A says action A is immorral then to them it > > is, if person B declares action A as moral then certianly to their POV > > it is so, and if person C declars action A berift of moralyity at all, > > I.E. Amorral then it is so according to them. > > > In short if a person says, this is good, bad or neither then that is > > their moraly system in play. > > > Joel may claim that his actions are no lacking in morality but I do > > not belivethis is the case. > > > On Aug 22, 3:50 pm, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > wow.... thank you for posting this Rigs... something to qusetion my own > > > weak > > > uninformed stands with... that line of Socrates"Do Gods love something > > > because it is holy or is it holy because Gods love it".... a friend said > > > it.. i mean it came up in a discussion and i didnt know it was socrates;-) > > > ... but anyways.... about what Joel says... well actually no i cant see > > > ethics without morality... so i am not too sure... need to give it more > > > thought in the shower.... > > > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 7:29 PM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > By Joel Marks- plus reader comments > > > > >http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/21/confessions-of-an-ex-... > > > > -- > > > EverComing- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
