21 Mar '10 19:57>
Due to various discussions on morality in recent threads I would like to summarize my thoughts on the matter and get some input.
I believe there are two types of morality.
1. It is wrong to harm your equals. It is also wrong to deliberately allow harm to come to your equals through inaction, though this may be adjusted according to the amount of effort required to prevent said harm.
2. What is really a different usage for the word, as in 'a person of loose morals' meaning that he doesn't adhere to the societies codes regarding sexual behavior.
I am mostly concerned with 1. and I believe that almost any talk of morality can be derived from what I have stated in 1.
I keep hearing people say things like "slavery was morally acceptable in the past and is no longer". I believe that that is not the case, but rather what has changed is who we accept as equals. The same issue comes up when we talk about whether it is morally acceptable to harm animals. It also comes up in fiction when there is a creature that is different from us who does not see us as equals. I have noticed this is often explored in fiction regarding vampires where there is almost invariably some who see themselves as superior to humans and thus do not see it as immoral to harm humans, and others who either see themselves as equal to humans or sometimes almost inferior, who see it as immoral to harm humans.
I believe there are two types of morality.
1. It is wrong to harm your equals. It is also wrong to deliberately allow harm to come to your equals through inaction, though this may be adjusted according to the amount of effort required to prevent said harm.
2. What is really a different usage for the word, as in 'a person of loose morals' meaning that he doesn't adhere to the societies codes regarding sexual behavior.
I am mostly concerned with 1. and I believe that almost any talk of morality can be derived from what I have stated in 1.
I keep hearing people say things like "slavery was morally acceptable in the past and is no longer". I believe that that is not the case, but rather what has changed is who we accept as equals. The same issue comes up when we talk about whether it is morally acceptable to harm animals. It also comes up in fiction when there is a creature that is different from us who does not see us as equals. I have noticed this is often explored in fiction regarding vampires where there is almost invariably some who see themselves as superior to humans and thus do not see it as immoral to harm humans, and others who either see themselves as equal to humans or sometimes almost inferior, who see it as immoral to harm humans.