Quote:
Originally Posted by PKFFW
We are discussing "moral codes" and as far as I know a moral code that consists of "I can kill whoever I like and it is good because I say it is good" does not conform with any definition of a moral code. Hence why I stated a moral code like this would be the ravings of a psychopath and not relevant to a discussion about moral codes.
|
Well, I did not know that there was a definition of moral code that restricted the possible instances. A moral code is for me just a set of moral rules or maybe a moral theory. For example in moral egoism (
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=265418) you can kill whoever you want if it is favorable for you.
I still do not think you distinguish between the concepts and moral philosophy and real world psychology.
Quote:
|
As I've explained before, a moral absolute must be specific. It can not be any other way. A general blanket statement about anything can not apply to all situations so how could it possibly be an absolute? Something that is specific by definition must come with prerequisites.
|
Well I have always seen that the unalienable rights in a rights based moral system were absolute rights and therfore moral absolutes in the meaning you now ascribe to moral absolute (previously you said it was that all normal humans agreed).