3 ms·
And? We were talking about commonly held ethical or moral beliefs. Not what "true morals" or "true ethics" are. I quote those, but I don't reject the idea
by lsc 11y ago
And? We were talking about commonly held ethical or moral beliefs. Not what "true morals" or "true ethics" are. I quote those, but I don't reject the idea that there are true morals or true ethics that exist outside of your opinion and my opinion. It certainly feels right that there is a truth somewhere that is bigger than my ego. I'm just pointing out that you can't use general agreement across time and culture as evidence for said external, objective true ethics, because such an agreement doesn't exist in a meaningful way.
- Retra 11y agoIt exists in a meaningful way, just as an approximation. Like how the concept of "tree" is meaningful in spite of the fact that every single plant on this planet is unique.
- lsc 11y agoWhen a significant number of people think that killing someone for blasphemy is a just thing to do? when a significant number of people a few centuries back thought that humans could be property? I'd compare this to finding a civilization that used the word "tree" to refer to Volkswagens. Yeah, I'm going to say that there isn't a meaningful agreement on ethics or morals across culture and time. This idea of an external set of ethics; an external morality that is "right" regardless of human opinion is a universal-ish concept, as far as I can tell, it's agreement on what those universal ethics are where there is disagreement.