September 30th, 2009 11:59 pm (UTC)
Absolute morality, Statistics or an Enforced Will.
If reason or logic is allowed?, There can only be three options for morality.
The morality of agreement (statistical) This is what the most of us agree on.
The morality of power (an enforced will) This is what is right because I can make you do it.
The morality of God (an absolute) This is a non statistical, or non enforced will form of morality. Even God must follow this, because it is a part of God's nature.
In the first case we should either be listening to the largest groups in the world, or be having a world wide referendum on what is moral.
India and China should be among the leading forces settng morality.
Possibly the UN would run the referendum.
The problem here is what could we all agree upon.
How would statistical morality be enforced
How often do we check to see if morality has changed.
There is no individual free will, only statistical will.
In the second case whoever has the most power sets morality.
If had won the war then he was right. At the moment the US
has the most power so we should be listening to them.
The problem here is whether might is right. War sets morality?
Powerful people are not always intelligent or loving.
There is no free will, only what I am forced to have by power.
In the third case absolute morality exists.
Either God communicates it to us or
we will have to discover it by studying the nature of God.
The problem here is that if absolute morals exist then
we will all be held to them. Absolute justice/judgement exists.
There is no free will, as morality is fixed.
If we are sensible no other expanations exist. There are no gushy feeling morals. Knowledge and Science constantly change and the more we know the less we agree on. In all three cases there is no free will.
I believe the whole world is mixed up with all three versions of morality.
Will one win out in the end. We will have to wait and see.