LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > Politics

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 1,161
0 members and 1,161 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 05:16 AM.
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 05-27-2005, 05:32 PM   #11
Spanky
For what it's worth
 
Spanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: With Thumper
Posts: 6,793
Sorry, Flinty, nothing personal

Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
This makes about as much sense as saying that a random mutation that helps us survive is the only source of religion.

Evolution may be responsible for our ability to reason, or to have faith, but that does not diminish the quality of our reasoning or the power of our faith.
It makes sense if you think reason can not be the basis of morality.

Before I made the following query:

What is wrong with this statement:

If morality is not based purely on ones self interest, then if someone uses the word morality, right or wrong (in the moral sense) in a conversation withsomeone else, those words can really only have meaning if the communicater and the person being communicated with agree on a common moral code.

The point being that either you agree on a code (like the ten commandments) or you agree on selfishness. Absense that you can have no foundation for morality. You can't reason out morality. Like I said before - why is killing innocent wrong. Absense a selfish argument (ie - if we let innocent people get killed then I am next) you can not come up with a logical explanation of why killing is wrong. You must just agree that it is.
Spanky is offline  
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:40 AM.