Quote:
Originally Posted by TimMason
Let me take up another thread: I will deny that animals can have anything like a morality. This is because I conceive of morality - or ethics - as conversational, and dogs do not have conversations. (They may exchange information, but they do not converse).
|
But for people who don't conceive morality as conversational, the question of other species is still up for discussion.
What's niggling me is that we haven't pinned down what ethics/morality actually is - it seems to have been shape shifting throughout this thread. Or, more likely, I just haven't understood what's been going on.
I don't find notions of morality relating to human wellbeing very satisfactory - too parochial and ultimately self-referential imho. If that's all it is, what's the big deal?
At the moment I'm clinging to my view that humans aren't ethical creatures (unless it suits them) - but it's an opinion that's teetering on the traditonal views of objective good and evil as a basis for morality.