The moral relativist cannot commit to principle, he has to view all principles as simultaneously right and wrong. The moment he commits to a principle, he becomes absolutist. The morality of the relativist is a phantasm. — Merkwurdichliebe
if we drop out of the fantasy land of intellectual talk, this becomes extremely obvious. — ghost
The morality one first adopts, and later comes to question, is (largely)relative to the situations they are born into and live through(take part in). — creativesoul
Be careful here. Not all intellectual talk is to be shunned simply because it is intellectual talk. Your post, for instance... plenty intellectual without fancy words. I like it. — creativesoul
I don't need a theoretical justification for the wrongness of hurting cats when I walk at night. Or of covering my mouth when I cough. So I'd say that within a culture the conscious moral discussion is focused on difficult cases where the gut-level principles of a culture clash. — ghost
Indeed. Our awareness of differences is heightened during conflict between opposing moral thought/belief. That is particularly the case when they've been held for a long time period. In these situations it is also often the case that there are innumerable other beliefs connected to them in some important way. Conviction of the moral variety can take hold. Righteous indignation can result, on both sides... — creativesoul
One thing that we need to address is prelinguistic thought/belief that is moral in kind...in other words, prelinguistic thought/belief about acceptable/unacceptable thought, belief, and/or behaviour. My question is how can we account for the notion of "acceptable/unacceptable" in the absence of language?
Imo, prelinguistic thought/belief is limited to nonrational and immediate corellations/associations/connections - primitive assessments. From the perspective of linguistic thought/belief, it is easy to impose the terms of acceptable/unacceptable upon the prelinguistic form, but from the perspective of prelinguistic thought/belief, the faculty of conceptualization has not yet been developed. As such, there can be no concept of acceptable/unacceptable. Prelinguistic thought/belief is incapable of the mode of thought/belief necessary to create/discover a rational worldview, and it certainly is incapable of abstraction, which is a necessary faculty for applying more complex concepts (like moral principles) onto particulars. — Merkwurdichliebe
Janus What is the ultimate source of morals...Strangelove! :razz: — Merkwurdichliebe
When it comes to social animals I think it has to do, not with the survival of lone individuals, where competition would be paramount, but with the survival of packs, herds, flocks or communities, where cooperation is foremost in, ultimately, making it more likely that the individuals who belong to those social collectives will survive.
I think it is emotion in the form of "fellow feeling": affection, empathy or love, as well as self-interest in the form of fear of ostracization, that ensures cooperation within animal and human collectives. It is for this reason that I say that valuing or caring about what binds the collective, and behaving, and for self-reflective beings such as ourselves, even thinking, in terms of that, is what is right and good for social animals; it is simply the best strategy. — Janus
To be clear, I was asking this in the context of: what is the source of morals? — Merkwurdichliebe
...My question is how can we account for the notion of "acceptable/unacceptable" in the absence of language? — Merkwurdichliebe
However, if morality is the result of evolution — creativesoul
What we need to do is discuss how morals arrive in prelinguistic thought/belief, both individually and culturally. — Merkwurdichliebe
Under our criterion, it would be thought/belief about evolution, by which we could talk about evolution of thought/belief. It is very paradoxical. — Merkwurdichliebe
What we need to do is discuss how morals arrive in prelinguistic thought/belief, both individually and culturally.
— Merkwurdichliebe
They don't. Only rudimentary moral belief are possible(similar to Janus' "proto-morality" and some notions of "moral intuition"). Morality and morals both require language. There are no prelinguistic morals or morality. — creativesoul
Not all moral thought/belief is morality. All morality is moral thought/belief. Not all moral thought/belief are moral principles. All moral principles are moral thought/belief. Not all moral thought/belief are social mores. All social mores are moral thought/belief. Etc. — creativesoul
Not all thought/belief about evolution is moral in kind. Paradox is a result of inadequate framework. No need for paradox here. — creativesoul
I don't have to remind myself not to play with my poop. And that's a second point I should sneak in. Lots of morality is automatic, and it's arguably this automatic stuff that's decisive. — ghost
So I'd say that within a culture the conscious moral discussion is focused on difficult cases where the gut-level principles of a culture clash. — ghost
Yet, not all prexisting valuations that factor into moral thought/belief are moral in kind. — Merkwurdichliebe
As a matter or morality or taste, though, I like being able to downshift into real talk. We've probably all met a few people who can't switch off the video game and speak usefully about the real world that sooner or later we end up having to deal with. — ghost
A balance must be strived for. — Merkwurdichliebe
I agree. I guess I was generally trying to point how much of our morality is 'beneath' the artificial theories we construct on top of that darkness. I'd say that the ultimate source of morals is as obscure as why there is something rather than nothing. But we can naturally think in terms of our genetic and historical evolution. — ghost
Consciousness is a ship at sea. It cannot ever hope to fathom the depths of its necessity. But we might be able to go fishing, and catch some reasonable genetic or historic explanations. I like fishing. — Merkwurdichliebe
I like noticing the darkness that surrounds us...but then getting out my fishing pole. I'm at peace with our ultimate ignorance. There is even something beautiful about an existence that is too large for our finite problem-oriented minds. — ghost
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.