4 ms·
I think you're either misunderstanding or reading too much into my point, siglesias. I'm not suggesting that "kill or be killed" is a great basis for society or
by bartonfink 16y ago
I think you're either misunderstanding or reading too much into my point, siglesias. I'm not suggesting that "kill or be killed" is a great basis for society or an ethical system. Just like with many other facts of nature, we can and often do improve on them by creating structures and constraints atop those facts we find unpleasant. However, those structures and constraits are inherently manufactured in the strictest sense of the word. Society is just a thin veneer atop a very ugly picture, and it's almost always in our best interests to keep that veneer in place. But it is, ultimately, just a veneer.
Frankly, this has little to do with the original post - I just made my original comment in response to someone saying "don't kill" is an example of a natural contract.
- siglesias 16y agoI just think that describing our ethical system as "artificial" is a tremendous misapplication of the term, and I think it would give most people evaluating your statement pause. On the other hand, I do find my aversion to killing rather natural in the sense that I needn't justify too much beyond my own instinct (and, if you should know, ethics as instinct is the subject of research with promising theories[1], but I'm not even talking about that). [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem