but can we compare the two and deduce which could be considered "more moral"? — Lif3r
Good for who? I think we have to pick what something is good for to determine the type of good we are talking about.
Is it good for the individual, society's evolution, the planet's evolution, or the universe's evolution?
Then we have to ask, what is more important?
And further, which is the most important?
From what I understand, morality is not completely objective. We agree as societies and individuals as to what we feel should be objective morally, but it changes.
This discussion is in another post, and I haven't posted in it because I am still piecing this concept together. — Lif3r
I dont buy it. Something is good if it creates a desirable outcome. — Lif3r
PS – If I were to grade myself on my ethics in this situation, I would give myself a B-) — Sam Sam
I understand the argument. What I don't understand is how it negates my original statements regarding society adopting principals in order to preserve it's existence. I'm not trying to imply that a popular moral is good or bad. I'm just saying that it exists. — Lif3r
That you almost faltered and that you did not instinctively return the ring offers you some data points to where you need to build your character. — Hanover
This is what I meant by your being a troll. This isn't worth addressing. — tim wood
But that's the point. You wrote above that you're merely eliciting responses. In these discussions, that's dishonest, at best disingenuous. You're either honest or dishonest, which is it? If you're honest, then a number of your posts here and elsewhere have not been honest. — tim wood
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.