Quote:
Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Generally, not much. Here are my nits on the statement -- I think here needs only be agreement on the relevant elements of a common moral code. If we're talking about "thou shalt not kill" evaluations of moral conduct, the way our respective moral codes view polygamy probably isn't relevant.
I also don't know if the introductory clause is necessary. If someone has a moral code based entirely on self-interest (assuming such a code rises to the level of a moral code), I'm not sure why the rest of the statement wouldn't apply.
|
OK - so you have to agree on the parts of the moral code that are relative to your discussion on morality. So in other words if you are talking about polygamy, you need to agree on the part of the code that discusses polygamy, but no others. That is valid.
I use the introductory clause because if both participants to the converation believe morality is all based on selfishness (which is commonly held belief among may Atheists and Agnostics), then you do have a basis for morality and you don't need a code. The discussion of polygamy and killing would then revolve around the issue over whether such rules if enforced would be in the interest of the participants of the conversation.
