religion

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by leewong [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Empathy is innate. Morality springs from empathy and our ability to reason...both being biological. So I would say it depends on where you draw the line.

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yeah, I think this is a good way of putting it.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

To clarify, when I said that morality was conceptual, I was referring to the ways that morality gets broken down or described. Morality exists in the same way that consciousness exists, semantical arguments aside of course.

[RobotElvis]

Originally Posted by leewong [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No, it doesnt. Name two societies that have exact matching concepts of what it is to be moral. There arent two let alone hundreds. Why does Saudi Arabia law differ from US law for instance? Completely different concepts of what it is to be moral.

You are missing the point of immutable morality. Laws do not define morality.
We need no laws to tell us that murder is wrong. It is a human trait to know murder is wrong. In every culture it is wrong for one individual to murder in cold blood another human. That is not a concept but a fact.

You tried to use a doorknob to illustrate concept.
But a doorknob serves a base function. Despite the different designs that have been conceived for a doorknob unless it serves the function as a lever with which to pull a door shut or to activate a mechanical device such as a latch it is not a doorknob.
A doorknob must serve a base function, anything outside of that function is an unnatural use of that doorknob and it no longer serves the purpose of being a doorknob.

So a doorknob is no more a concept than morality is.
Both have a functional use and any unnatural use of either one means it must be set apart from its natural function.

[iruinedyourday]

Originally Posted by KagatobLuvsAnimu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That sounds too absolute though. Is it at times not more helpful for your tribe to wipe out a neighboring tribe whether it be competing for scarce resources or as a firm of self defense?

that is a totaly different survival instinct than the one that takes over AFTER you wipe out that tribe allowing you to live in harmony with your brothers and sisters instaed of just raping and murdering your sister and brother.

Every emotion, is just survival instincts.

We are nothing more than an animal with a sense of self worth that provides us with the desire to procreate & avoid death, with a side effect of thinking we are more special than are.

All we are is dust in the wind.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by RobotElvis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You are missing the point of immutable morality. Laws do not define morality.
We need no laws to tell us that murder is wrong. It is a human trait to know murder is wrong. In every culture it is wrong for one individual to murder in cold blood another human. That is not a concept but a fact.

You tried to use a doorknob to illustrate concept.
But a doorknob serves a base function. Despite the different designs that have been conceived for a doorknob unless it serves the function as a lever with which to pull a door shut or to activate a mechanical device such as a latch it is not a doorknob.
A doorknob must serve a base function, anything outside of that function is an unnatural use of that doorknob and it no longer serves the purpose of being a doorknob.

So a doorknob is no more a concept than morality is.
Both have a functional use and any unnatural use of either one means it must be set apart from its natural function.

Murder is not universally "wrong" in every society. If that was true honor killings wouldn't be a thing. ISIS beheadings wouldn't be a thing. The Soviet Union would not have been a thing. The conquest of the Americas... do you get the picture yet?

[paulgiamatti]

Originally Posted by RobotElvis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Both have a functional use and any unnatural use of either one means it must be set apart from its natural function.

I think I know what you mean here, but I'm inclined to say that I disagree and that morality should be more simple than this. Instead of saying that atrocious, reprehensible crimes are a perversion of morality, I'd say they're simply a result of the exploitation of superstitious beliefs. It's not morality in a different, perverted form; it's amorality. It's no longer moral in any way.

[Barkingturtle]

Originally Posted by RobotElvis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You are missing the point of immutable morality. Laws do not define morality.
We need no laws to tell us that murder is wrong. It is a human trait to know murder is wrong. In every culture it is wrong for one individual to murder in cold blood another human. That is not a concept but a fact.

Hahaha, no.

Nothing is absolute as you'd like it to be. There is no good, nor evil. Morality is the sum of many choices, not some divine seed planted in the hearts of men.

That you view the world in such a simplistic way is your right, and it's very quaint, but it also disqualifies you from being taken seriously at the adult table.

[Barkingturtle]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think I know what you mean here, but I'm inclined to say that I disagree and that morality should be more simple than this. Instead of saying that atrocious, reprehensible crimes are a perversion of morality, I'd say they're simply a result of the exploitation of superstitious beliefs. It's not morality in a different, perverted form; it's amorality. It's no longer moral in any way.

Well you should can't just redefine word based on your ignorance, you dumb fuck.

[paulgiamatti]

Nor can you make baseless accusations against someone based on yours.

[paulgiamatti]

Well, I mean, you can, but it's no skin off my back.