Quote:
Originally Posted by nguirado
Just to be clear. The person in your example is being perfectly reasonable, according to him premise. You're confusing "reason" with a morality that most people think is silly. Nobody holds the premise that certain letters denote superiority.
|
It doesn't need to be a fight, it can just be a discussion
Is it your position that morality needs some underpinning from outside the human realm - i.e. a god - otherwise all moral positions are contingent and relative? If that's right then you do seem to be committed to saying that the morality in my made up example - no living being should be intentionally harmed unless it's name in English begins with W - is, in some sense, "as good as" any other morality based on different principles. At the same time as being committed to that you also seem to recognize that the position in my example is just plain daft.
The point is not whether anyone actually holds that position, but that if they did, whether we can tell any difference between that position and one which held, for example, that no living creature should be intentionally harmed - whatever letter it's name started with. You seem to be saying that we cannot, (because neither position is vouchsafed by god).