3 ms·
Human moral development seems to be a cycle of an outburst of violence, followed by a dramatic retrenchment of violence in response. Each iteration brings great
by koboll 8y ago
Human moral development seems to be a cycle of an outburst of violence, followed by a dramatic retrenchment of violence in response. Each iteration brings greater violence and then an even greater retrenchment.
Eons ago we discovered through this cycle that rape and murder are wrong and should be met with cutting the offender off from society permanently. 75 years ago we discovered that systematic genocide and wars for land are wrong and should never be tolerated.
We are still recovering from that retrenchment, I think. As it fades further into the mists of history, the next violent phase of the cycle looms closer. It's uncertain whether we'll be around to discover any more moral lessons after it passes.
- porpoisely 8y agoHuman moral development is the outburst of violence and ultimately the victors defining virtue and morality and law. All one has to do is look at ww2 to see this. "Eons ago we discovered through this cycle that rape and murder are wrong and should be met with cutting the offender off from society permanently." When did we discover this? Our greatest heroes are murderers and rapists. "75 years ago we discovered that systematic genocide and wars for land are wrong and should never be tolerated." Or the countries that committed the most systematic genocide and stole the most land decided that such behavior shouldn't be tolerated since they have the most to lose now. Laws, virtue, morality, etc are all nonsense the victors created to protect their own self interests. The human experience is that of selfishness and hypocrisy and violence. There is no virtue, laws or morality without the threat of violence. The world order is buttressed by armies not by morality, laws or virtue. Always has been and always will be.
- boronine 8y agoThe “solution” to rape and murder is to have a state strong enough to monopolize violence and eliminate offenders. The “solution” to wars for land is to have an empire effectively own all the land such that any attempt of conquest is a local conflict that will be pacified by the empire. Genocide is more complicated as it can often be in the interest of the state. The fact that we haven’t engaged in genocide in 75 years is indeed curious. Still, I question your theme of moral progress. History would suggest that it will go the other way as the empire inevitably starts to weaken.