Sigh….
“So you are saying simply that right and wrong is just a matter majority support to such?”
Why must you always attempt to simplify or is that the only way that you can grasps larger and more complex subjects? Once again, morality is social contract not an immutable law.
“Call it moral universalism or statistical correlation,” let’s not because neither you nor I have any clue as to what you are describing. Moral universalism, statistical correlation! What you are your going on about, a search for .25 cent expressions without a dimes worth of meaning?
“is the belief that right and wrong is simply a matter of having the most support to a particular belief.”
Look I don’t have as much free time as you apparently have so try a little reading on the meaning of morality.
The Definition of Morality (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
“We can argue all day about validity of religion,”
We haven’t even begun to discuss the validity or invalidity of religion must less argue about it, so your argument that I believe that religion is false is purely presumptive on your part. Again an attempt to simplify a much more complex view point.
“In the end, one is a devotion to an absolute and the other is a devotion to social change”
What devotion to an absolute do you refer to since as I have pointed out ad nauseum that the Christian faith of today is not the Christian faith of 50 years ago much less 3,000. Why you are in denial of this is beyond my comprehension.
“An absolute system, such as some religions prescribe requires first that those who contest violate its tenants and through majority force change among it.”
So, stoning a raped woman is moral because of in doing so they adhere to an absolute system?
“Personally, I see it as an open door for justification of any action because its primary requirement to validation is merely agreement. A society can eat its own children and by the process to which you hold to, it would be correct if the majority deemed it so.”
Just out of curiosity, would it be immoral for an isolated nomadic tribe, snowbound and inextricably mired in a blizzard to kill the dying to feed the young in order to avoid the tribes very extinction?
“In the system you describe, contest is only valid when enough agree to form a majority and overrule while in the absolute system, contest is valid until that majority overpowers them.”
Again you can’t have it both ways.
If you are free to pursue whatever you think is morally right, why do you deny this right to others?
You yourself pointed out that slavery was not only legally sanctioned but sanctioned by the morality of the church. Yet it was overthrown and a new morality put in its place. Would you care to reconcile those two contradictory points?
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
