5 ms·
Questions, then, genuine interest in how you see this (not looking for flames). What is wrong with judging then by the standards of now? If we did as you seem
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Questions, then, genuine interest in how you see this (not looking for flames).
What is wrong with judging then by the standards of now?
If we did as you seem to suggest and not judge, wouldn't that negate the ability to learn from past mistakes because you hinder recognition of those mistakes?
- yung_steezy 4y agoI suppose the danger is believing that we are substantively different to people who came before us, or that our current moral beliefs are correct. Our moral judgements may seem correct now but there's a good chance future generations will look back on us unfavourably too.
- zasdffaa 4y ago> I suppose the danger is believing that we are substantively different to people who came before us genetically no, morally - well perhaps somewhat. Arguably. Maybe. Can you really rule it out? > or that our current moral beliefs are corrector that our current moral beliefs are correct We can be better without reaching perfection. > Our moral judgements may seem correct now but there's a good chance future generations will look back on us unfavourably too. I quite agree! Still, we can learn from the past and we should. You seem to be disagree that it's possible or meaningful to do so.
- mmcdermott 4y ago> Still, we can learn from the past and we should. You seem to be disagree that it's possible or meaningful to do so. This might be a matter of perspective. The idea that humans haven't fundamentally (either morally or genetically) changed means that history cannot be discarded out of hand and is valuable. It can't be written off as being "different back then."