tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post115397379421317539..comments2023-10-24T04:29:23.693-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: Moral Sense and Moral NonsenseAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1154062960226783622006-07-27T23:02:00.000-06:002006-07-27T23:02:00.000-06:00boelfI hold that it really makes no sense to tie m...<B>boelf</B><BR/><BR/>I hold that it really makes no sense to tie morality in with evolution. Morality has to do with the desires and aversions we create through social conditioning. The desires that we have acquired through evolution (e.g., the appetities such as hunger and sex, maternal affection, pair bonding) are background conditions on which morality operates, like the laws of physics. The laws of physics are not moral laws. The laws of evolution (and the consequences of evolution) are not moral laws.<BR/><BR/>You state that you do not take the time to discern the right thing except when the moral alarms go off.<BR/><BR/>I suggest that the greatest evils are committed by people who follow that example. Slave owners, Nazis, and religious zealots in a Crusade or Jihad, I wager, typically do not hear any moral alarms going off. They should, but they do not.<BR/><BR/>One of the questions that we need to ask ourselves is whether our moral alarms are properly set. Perhaps they are not going off when they should.<BR/><BR/>Personally, I do not trust my moral alarm at all.Alonzo Fyfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1154047319264521482006-07-27T18:41:00.000-06:002006-07-27T18:41:00.000-06:00Hellbound AlleeeI am afriad that I cannot tell wha...<B>Hellbound Alleee</B><BR/><BR/>I am afriad that I cannot tell what you are directing your comments towards.<BR/><BR/>I do not think that they can be directed at me because I am an opponent to all types of "common moral relativism" and have argued against these systems repeatedly. In fact, this post is derived from comments that I made objecting to, among other things, common moral relativism.<BR/><BR/>So, perhaps you wrote this in order to support my position. However, all value has everything to do with likes and dislikes. Indeed, a "value" is a relationship between a state of affairs and a set of desires (likes and dislikes). Without likes and dislikes -- without desires -- there is no value. However, desires are real, so values are real -- as real as the people who do the valuing.<BR/><BR/>So, I need some clarification as to what your objections are.<BR/><BR/>I have a long history of opposition to any type of "cultural morality". I believe in an objective right and wrong.Alonzo Fyfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1154047060608616142006-07-27T18:37:00.000-06:002006-07-27T18:37:00.000-06:00Derek ScruggsOf course we have desires that have b...<B>Derek Scruggs</B><BR/><BR/>Of course we have desires that have been molded through evolution. However, there is no 'ought' associated with these desires. There is as little 'ought' associated with the calf suckling from its mother than there is with the buck mating earlier -- and as little as we find with humans mating, or the preference in taste for the high-calorie food that kept our biological ancestors alive. There are no 'oughts' associated with any of these.<BR/><BR/>As you say, some of these basic drives support, and others undermine morality. In addition to an evolved disposition towards altrusim, we may also have an evolved disposition towards racism and rape.<BR/><BR/>Not everything is genetic. I have a belief that I am in Colorado. Certainly, nobody expects to find a "belief that I am in Colorado" gene. Certainly, genetics plays a role in creating the basic structure for learning -- but what is actually learned is caused by interaction with the environment. What we desire is heavily influenced by interaction with the environment as well, where individual differences in our environment result in individual differences in our beliefs and desires.<BR/><BR/>In all of this there is no 'moral sense'. I see no need to postulate the existence of such an entity.Alonzo Fyfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1154012615020018112006-07-27T09:03:00.000-06:002006-07-27T09:03:00.000-06:00I think such cultural morality is a fantasy. Moral...I think such cultural morality is a fantasy. Morality has little to do with likes and dislikes: if you think your morality is based on that, you're doing it wrong. Morality is the study of causality as it relates to human action. What you do has an effect, no matter what--it's called causality. "Your likes" in another way of saying "your values." These values can be judged, evaluated rationally. In this way, we wouldn't want to call it a "moral sense," if it causes that sort of discomfort in those who imagine morality as a sort of belief system. There is no morality in belief. Morality is the reality, irrational values are the beliefs.<BR/><BR/>I say bull to cultural morality because culture is not a reality. There is no true definition of a culture, and no individual is owned by one and only one culture. Since a culture cannot be truly defined, it cannot define a morality. State force has nothing to do with morality, any more than religious threat does.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://hellboundalleee.blogspot.com/2006/05/war-on-relativism.html" REL="nofollow">Hellbound Alleee: The War on Relativism "Carnival"</A>Hellbound Alleeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10268832216080854759noreply@blogger.com