Quote:
Originally Posted by TGS
Is it a moral question because the ants can experience pain?
|
No, it's a moral question because of the underlying value of life involved. No matter how little or how much you value that life, it's the fact that there is a value at all which makes it a moral question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TGS
If ants are not to be stepped upon, which on one interpretation means something like in an ideal world no ant should ever be stepped upon, I'm not sure I understand how it is invalid to then ask what, given that we do not live in an ideal world, can be expected of someone who knows that ants should not be stepped upon in order to avoid stepping on them.
|
As per my prior example:
* Jains go to great length to avoid harming any creatures - including carrying a small broom to sweep their path to avoid stepping on ants.
* Buddhists value all life, and try to avoid causing any suffering - but don't go to the lengths which the Jains do.
* I am not a Buddhist - but I avoid unnecessary killing. I will carry a cricket outside instead of killing it; open a window to let out a fly instead of reaching for a flyswatter. But I don't even go to the lengths which the Buddhists do. I have not felt any major twinges of guilt when cleaning my windshield.
* and there are people who drive around running over turtles, squirrels & armadillos for fun and still consider themselves "good" people.
It's invalid because there is no single, "right" answer to that question. There is no direct relation between an action being "moral", and the "morality" of that act. Its morality is purely based on the values of the actor - or of the viewer.
The "stepping on ants" example really boils down to "what is the morality of killing?" which is based on the value of life *and* your ethical horizon - both of which can vary based on culture, up-bringing, etc.
Troy