• Merkwurdichliebe
    1.3k
    Since morality is the rules of acceptable/unacceptable thought, belief, and/or behaviour and rules are existentially dependent upon language, then so too is morality. Communication results from successful language use. However, there is nothing to stop certain circumstances from arising in which there's not much of an agreement between those governed by the rules, and those writing and/or otherwise determining/establishing the rules.

    The signing of an agreement is concrete enough proof of all parties consenting to the terms within. Although, cases can and ought be made against deliberate deception underlying some contracts/agreements.

    If one signs on insincerely, they are still liable/responsible for keeping to the terms of the agreement.
    creativesoul

    When two parties commit to opposing ethical principles, responsibility clashes. So we must account for the infiltration and subversion of alien morals within a culture defined by a heavily enforced morality. There is outright disregard for accepted rules, immorality. But conscientious moral dissention seems to view the established cultural mores as outmoded and decadent, in contrast to the moral right that it represents.
  • creativesoul
    5.8k
    ...for every moral reason, there is always an opposite/contradictory reason. This is in contrast to say mathematical/logical reason that has a strict criterion and little room for dissention.Merkwurdichliebe

    Moral reasoning often includes both mathematical and logical reasoning.

    All can be mistaken. History shows this.
  • creativesoul
    5.8k
    Moral thought/belief permits for a greater range of reasoning, and because of that it sprawls into an indeterminate irrationality.Merkwurdichliebe

    Not sure about that logical train...

    All thought/belief that exists in it's entirety prior to it's being taken into consideration by the thinking/believing creature is irrational. All pre-reflective thought/belief is irrational.

    Some is well-grounded and true.

    Because of that, we can know that not all irrational thought/belief are on equal ground. They are certainly not all prone to the same mistakes. I'm assuming 'indeterminate irrationality' has negative connotation. It's being invoked as though It's not something we ought aspire towards, but... avoid.

    I find it unwise to avoid well-grounded true belief. Given the choice between being extremely rational, well argued for, and false on the one hand and being irrational, well-grounded, and true on the other...

    Given that choice, I'm erring on the side of well-grounded and true each and every time.
  • creativesoul
    5.8k
    It is a higher kind of thought/belief because it involves a more complex form of abstract speculation.Merkwurdichliebe

    Again...

    Not sure about this logical train...

    Some complex forms of abstract speculation are false. Some simple moral thought/belief are true.

    Which is more valuable here?


    It is not a supremely useful or efficient mode of thought/belief, but it is highly concerned with consequence, which has deep psychological significance -
    qua. redemption/damnation. There is something much more personal about consciously doing right/wrong, than say building an engine/system. Doing right by building an engine/system would be supremely personal. I might be off here, but I'm just exploring the connotations.
    Merkwurdichliebe

    When doing what's right is an operative guiding principle of one's behaviour, it becomes causal in it's affects on the agent, and their effects on the world.

    I agree that aiming to do what's right has visceral affects/effects. I agree that some people driven by moral thought/belief are driven by thought/belief that has been taken upon and perpetuated by pure faith alone. I agree that some of these people are irrational, because they themselves cannot offer a reason, or an academically accepted line of reasoning to support the confidence, certainty, and/or conviction that accompanies their belief statements.

    I disagree with covert implications that one ought disregard and/or dissent from a statement spoken by one who cannot argue well for it, simply because they cannot argue well for it.
  • creativesoul
    5.8k
    I think you are onto something.Merkwurdichliebe

    We'll see.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment