In discussing sources I wish to stress I am excluding the wonderful advances in forensic science
which solves so many crimes
But talking say of morality; where did it come from? Where did it originate? What is the source?
Genealogy (a line of descent traced continuously from an ancestor) usually.is meticulous, and patiently documented. But this documentary approach operates on a field of entangled word of mouth, on ancient parchments, on documents that have been scratched over and re-copied many times. On this basis, the tendency in describing the history of morality in terms of a linear development—in reducing its entire history and genesis to an exclusive concern for serviceableness, and in the case of 'thinkers'
like Nancy Pelosi and Michelle Obama for self advancement by way of moral superiority of your betters and brow beating moral absolutism.
To assume morality has an inherent validity is to assume throughout aeons of time words have kept their meaning, that desires still pointed in a single direction, and that ideas retained their logic;
to assume that morality inheres in us in some unchanging way is to blindly ignore the fact that the world of speech and desires has known invasions, struggles, plundering, disguises, ploys.
On this view point (and I agree with Hume here) morality are no more than the sentiments of the day.
which solves so many crimes
But talking say of morality; where did it come from? Where did it originate? What is the source?
Genealogy (a line of descent traced continuously from an ancestor) usually.is meticulous, and patiently documented. But this documentary approach operates on a field of entangled word of mouth, on ancient parchments, on documents that have been scratched over and re-copied many times. On this basis, the tendency in describing the history of morality in terms of a linear development—in reducing its entire history and genesis to an exclusive concern for serviceableness, and in the case of 'thinkers'
like Nancy Pelosi and Michelle Obama for self advancement by way of moral superiority of your betters and brow beating moral absolutism.
To assume morality has an inherent validity is to assume throughout aeons of time words have kept their meaning, that desires still pointed in a single direction, and that ideas retained their logic;
to assume that morality inheres in us in some unchanging way is to blindly ignore the fact that the world of speech and desires has known invasions, struggles, plundering, disguises, ploys.
On this view point (and I agree with Hume here) morality are no more than the sentiments of the day.
No comments:
Post a Comment