View Single Post
Old 09-21-2012, 11:04 AM   #11
harriettvanders

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
458
Senior Member
Default
If it comes to “protecting once family” they are not that different. Surely there are wars and killings between gangs in same prison, there are no wars and killings between families in same village or city. But members of same ordinary families are sent to war for the tribe or country and eagerly kill members of other ordinary families of different tribe, religion or country. The biggest difference, in my opinion, is that gang members are usually emotionally unstable, brain damaged or psychopathic, compared to members of ordinary family. They war more often and actually might experience pleasure derived from torturing and killing others.
Domestic violence and civil wars are more common that most would like to admit. Whether we chose to look at Sharia law or female circumcision in the Sudan, when moral principles are used to further the gain of one idea or believe system over another we find this 'losing sight of the forest for the single tree that stands in front of us' scenario.

This sounds very homocentric, and it comes only from not enough observation of our closest relatives. I’m pretty sure you will find your, above mentioned, examples in primates or even other social mammals like pack of wolfs, or deer.
Your point is a valid one, I simply used similar types to express that moral evolution within primitive species does exist and that there are precidents in primate sub-types with genetic affinity to humans. Sub-human primate types display morality in an instinctual manner, not formalizing it the way humans do. Humans add an un-nurtured element to the mix, that IMO cannot be accounted for solely by genetic heredity or an inherent moral compass as it were. This is evident in poor morality cases that display intense morality that is disfunctional on both individual and societal levels. These cases are too widespread to label 'due to illness or mental instability' unless off-course one subscribes to theories of 'group psychosis' which I am not an adherent of.

There is no such thing as pre-moral. If morality is understanding and election of right and wrong, what pre-moral is then? Recognition of pre-right and pre-wrong, or sort of right and maybe wrong?
Pre-moral simply reflects the accidental manner in which certain sub-human primate species express caring and social exclusion within their troupe. It is not moral as these behaviors do not seem to be expressed regularly or in a pattern that would deem these interactions 'group' or individual behavior. In these primitive examples these behavior do not appear to be motivated by a moral code, rather than a group of elementary and reactionary behaviors that suggest human morality may have had similar beginnings.

I have to admit you lost me here. Let’s have an example:Least corrupt country is Denmark - Most corrupt is Somalia, by these standards:Are you saying that Somalia has more morality and less personal freedoms than Denmark? By more morality, do you mean more moral person or more moral laws?
Somalia is a good example of a society that expresses its morality in extremist terms, one could say that moral principles are more rigid in the manner in which they are expressed and in many cases substitute civil law. Denmark is a good example of how morality is less rigidly applies and one could argue, less of a factor in Danish society than Somali society. Your perception of morality as beneficial is problematic to the discussion as it serves no real objective other than strengthen certain core beliefs you express regarding humanity or human nature.

You are painting a very sad picture of human nature. I’m glad I’ve escaped “communism”, the dictator ship of proletariat. Another example of dead end morality.
It is what it is, morality is oppressive in a very many ways. I prefer to focus on the emotional aspect as this leads people to self-discovery.

Thanks for engaging in this subject. We don’t see eye to eye, but it is very interesting to hear others perspective.
Thank-you for an interesting thread. I find your opinions engaging and value your contributions on this topic.
harriettvanders is offline


 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:46 AM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity