4 ms·

> thereby treating them as having the moral awareness of chimpanzees Is one of your premises that morality is something that has an objective scale and ours is

> thereby treating them as having the moral awareness of chimpanzees Is one of your premises that morality is something that has an objective scale and ours is better developed than theirs? Non-agrarian societies around the world tend to have cultures/religions more similar to each other than to ours, in part because it's more advantageous to how they live their lives. As an example: a lot of hunter-gatherer cultures have a way of committing what we'd consider infanticide. Agrarian cultures would tend to frown on that since "all humans have a soul", but the reality of moving around with limited food means that you have to find some way of controlling population. Another example: the way we treat livestock might be appalling to hunter-gatherers since "animals have souls too". But farmers need to raise and slaughter herd animals to survive. > uncontacted tribes live outside of national and international laws Also consider that maybe they have their own laws that you and I are in violation of, who's laws should we follow?

SamReidHughes 8y ago
Yes, ours is better developed. (Mine, maybe not yours.) Murdering people is in fact wrong no matter what family you or they grow up in.
- jmts 8y ago
  Murder is wrong because murder has a specific definition, and the society that we live in has defined that as wrong. A soldier killing a soldier is allowed during wartime (generally). We have judged that differently. There are a number of reasons why you might kill a person. Some are allowed, and some aren't. It is a fact that your society has a law prohibiting civilians committing murder. Whether the killing of a person is "right" or "wrong" by law is a moral judgement - not a fact - depending on who did it, how they did it, when it was done, and how your culture combines those factors. These tribes likely have similar beliefs, they just might be different to yours. Assuming yours is are the 'correct' ones, is arrogant.
  - SamReidHughes 8y ago
    You're over-educated, unable to plainly say you don't believe there is such a thing as morality.
- ncallaway 8y ago
  Does this apply to soldiers in wartime? Most societies will not prosecute one of their soldiers who kills another human on the battlefield. Is this murder? Does your state make it illegal for a soldier to kill in wartime? Many countries have eliminated the death-penalty, but some retain it. Is the executioner a murderer for a state-sponsored execution? Most states have laws allowing violence if you're in immediate danger. If you kill someone in your state is that murder?
- empath75 8y ago
  Murdering people by definition is wrong, but it is not murder every time a person is killed by another person. If someone murders someone in the us, they can get the death penalty. If someone kills someone in self defense, that’s not murder. These people have government of a kind and a moral and ethical system. If the tribe kills someone within their own cultural traditions, that’s not murder. Once they’re contacted and brought into a larger society, of course, that changes, but that’s a process that needs to be negotiated.
- projektfu 8y ago
  Try reading "The Story of B". It discusses this exact circumstance.
- chillacy 8y ago
  Other posters have already brought up some good examples to chew on, if it all seems so simple to you perhaps you’re oversimplifying things.
jnbiche 8y ago
> Is one of your premises that morality is something that has an objective scale Uh, yes. I'm not a moral relativist. If you are, I'm sure you're aware of the tricky outcomes of that approach. For example, if you're a moral relativist, then you can't remain consistent with your beliefs and still criticize US executions (I find that most moral relativists reasonably disagree with the US death penalty).
- chillacy 8y ago
  What are the tricky things? On the death penalty in the US: I think it's financially disastrous in the US (executions are more expensive than life imprisonment) and makes it difficult to undo wrongful convictions in line with Blackstone's Ratio. But neither of those are particularly moral. I'd flip it around and ask how you bootstrap a moral system for all humans (or is it all life?) from scratch. It seems unlikely that I, of all cultures and times, am the pinnacle of morality in the same way that it would be unlikely that I just happened to be born into a family that practices the one correct religion in the world. Maybe you'd think that I'm inhumane or something, but my beliefs are largely the results of a lot of traveling and meeting the moral absolutists all over the world tell me with the same level of conviction what is right and wrong.

SamReidHughes 8y ago

Yes, ours is better developed. (Mine, maybe not yours.) Murdering people is in fact wrong no matter what family you or they grow up in.

jmts 8y ago
Murder is wrong because murder has a specific definition, and the society that we live in has defined that as wrong. A soldier killing a soldier is allowed during wartime (generally). We have judged that differently. There are a number of reasons why you might kill a person. Some are allowed, and some aren't. It is a fact that your society has a law prohibiting civilians committing murder. Whether the killing of a person is "right" or "wrong" by law is a moral judgement - not a fact - depending on who did it, how they did it, when it was done, and how your culture combines those factors. These tribes likely have similar beliefs, they just might be different to yours. Assuming yours is are the 'correct' ones, is arrogant.
- SamReidHughes 8y ago
  You're over-educated, unable to plainly say you don't believe there is such a thing as morality.
ncallaway 8y ago
Does this apply to soldiers in wartime? Most societies will not prosecute one of their soldiers who kills another human on the battlefield. Is this murder? Does your state make it illegal for a soldier to kill in wartime? Many countries have eliminated the death-penalty, but some retain it. Is the executioner a murderer for a state-sponsored execution? Most states have laws allowing violence if you're in immediate danger. If you kill someone in your state is that murder?
empath75 8y ago
Murdering people by definition is wrong, but it is not murder every time a person is killed by another person. If someone murders someone in the us, they can get the death penalty. If someone kills someone in self defense, that’s not murder. These people have government of a kind and a moral and ethical system. If the tribe kills someone within their own cultural traditions, that’s not murder. Once they’re contacted and brought into a larger society, of course, that changes, but that’s a process that needs to be negotiated.
projektfu 8y ago
Try reading "The Story of B". It discusses this exact circumstance.
chillacy 8y ago
Other posters have already brought up some good examples to chew on, if it all seems so simple to you perhaps you’re oversimplifying things.

jnbiche 8y ago

> Is one of your premises that morality is something that has an objective scale Uh, yes. I'm not a moral relativist. If you are, I'm sure you're aware of the tricky outcomes of that approach. For example, if you're a moral relativist, then you can't remain consistent with your beliefs and still criticize US executions (I find that most moral relativists reasonably disagree with the US death penalty).

chillacy 8y ago
What are the tricky things? On the death penalty in the US: I think it's financially disastrous in the US (executions are more expensive than life imprisonment) and makes it difficult to undo wrongful convictions in line with Blackstone's Ratio. But neither of those are particularly moral. I'd flip it around and ask how you bootstrap a moral system for all humans (or is it all life?) from scratch. It seems unlikely that I, of all cultures and times, am the pinnacle of morality in the same way that it would be unlikely that I just happened to be born into a family that practices the one correct religion in the world. Maybe you'd think that I'm inhumane or something, but my beliefs are largely the results of a lot of traveling and meeting the moral absolutists all over the world tell me with the same level of conviction what is right and wrong.