Is it not a good idea to delve into the evolution of morals, I mean how did 'morality' come about? In evolutionary terms it was: don't harm me or my offspring and perhaps some repricosity I will share this food with you for if I don't there could be trouble.
Both can be viewed as self interest.
Delving deeper into the x constituent of morality it cannot be causa sui, (self caused) for it did not just rise up from the swamp and appear to us and if you believe that then you are into metapsyhics and have deontologised the argument by seeing morality as a duty an obligation.
But back to today, where 99% of the population whether Religious or not
believe there is such a thing as morality, existing and has always been since the Garden of Eden and there it is and we just have to pick at it like so much low hanging fruit.However there is little reason to think that a single definition of morality will be applicable to all moral discussions. One reason for this is that present day 'morality' seems to be used in two distinct broad senses: a descriptive sense -to refer to certain codes of conduct put forward by a society or a group and a normative sense - to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational person. If one desired a 'moral' take we might view 'morality' as no more a self serving utility - especially useful when we were on the Savannah
but of little use today if displayed to us by morally preening Hollywood divas
No comments:
Post a Comment