 |
|
dejon
|
|
Maybe it all stems from the first group of cave men that realized that if they hunted together they could take down a larger animal.
This meant all of a sudden you wanted happy co-hunters - killing them, their kin, or raping their women could be detrimental to the group.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alex
|
 |
Brasil
Mar 1999
time: 02:19
|
|
quote:
The fable of intelligible freedom.— The principal stages in the history of the sensations by virtue of which we make anyone accountable for his actions, that is to say, of the moral sensations, are as follows. First of all, one calls individual actions good or bad quite irrespective of their motives but solely on account of their useful or harmful consequences. Soon, however, one forgets the origin of these designations and believes that the quality "good" and "evil" is inherent in the actions themselves, irrespective of their consequences: thus committing the same error as that by which language designates the stone itself as hard, the tree itself as green—that is to say, by taking for cause that which is effect. Then one consigns the being good or being evil to the motives and regards the deeds in themselves as morally ambiguous. One goes further and accords the predicate good or evil no longer to the individual motive but to the whole nature of a man out of whom the motive grows as the plant does from the soil. Thus one successively makes men accountable for the effects they produce, then for their actions, then for their motives, and finally for their nature. Now one finally discovers that this nature, too, cannot be accountable, in as much as it is altogether a necessary consequence and assembled from the elements and influences of things past and present: that is to say, that man can be made accountable for nothing, not for his nature, nor for his motives, nor for his actions, nor for the effect he produces. One has thereby attained to the knowledge that the history of the moral sensations if the history of an error, the error of accountability, which rests on the error of freedom of will. |
Nietzsche, "Human, All Too Human"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kidicious
I think it takes a special individual to have a conscience. |
That's not true. People who have no conscience are quite rare and actually have a psychological condition refered to variously as: psychopathy, sociopathy, or disassociative behavior. Conscience is a fancy word for empathy, and empthay is another one of those important survival traits. Without it, we wouldn't care for other members of our social groups, and we'd have never survived.
Last edited by chegitz guevara on 12-11-2004 at 02:36
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wycoff
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kidicious
Stealing is morally wrong because rulers have desired it to be so. They created rules against it to defend what they claimed to be theirs. |
People like to have possessions. Rulers didn't instill this into their ruled, its innate. Furthermore, its not innate just in humans. Animals also like possessions. How many of you have pets that "claim" something as theirs, jealously guarding it from other animals and even from people?
People guard their possessions just like other animals do. If someone tries to take what they consider theirs, the owner will usually try to defend their property. This defense of their property leads to conflict. To prevent society from imploding from constant conflict over personal property, society developed a system that viewed stealing something as being wrong.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
 |
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:19
|
|
quote:
My guess is that societies made up rules to keep people in line, such as 'don't steal' and 'don't kill.' At this time religion and state were one, so I think eventually these laws became viewed as morals. |
Societies didn't make up the rules, they adopted them from human nature or "God".
Morals derive from identifiable ~universal desires, for example, life and liberty are ~universal desires, therefore, it is immoral to murder or enslave others. Some would say these desires come from "God", others say they "evolved", regardless, since morality is a human concept it must be based on what we share as humans. If everyone agrees, then a moral principle can be established from which other morals can be adduced. The problem many have is they forget the principles upon which morality is based when creating "societal" morality and they end up becoming immoral in the name of being morality - and "God" finds this very offensive...
Kid quote:
The rulers picked THOSE rules, because THOSE rules helped them rule. |
He asked where morals come from, do you think those rulers were moral?
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19.
Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-11-2004 00:28
|