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.
Certain things are common to most, details can vary. Prohibitions against murder (killing members of your own group) can be found in many social animal species.
I'm not interested in speculating about morality among reptiles and ducks.
It's complicated and difficult, but moral codes are NOT arbitrary and they ARE necessary.
What "code" should we go by?
The one the Bloods, Crips, & human trafficers go by?
The one Planned Parenthood goes by?
The one the different Armies in the history of the world have gone by?
Nope...what is the "right" thing to do is subjective.
It is common sense because it is inborn, since we are social animals. It was wrong to elevate it to a divine level and tie it to spirituality.
Maybe I would use the term "conditional" over subjective. "Objective", as in some things our species just shouldn't do is ok in a general sense to me.
Some is coded in and some is etched in by experience. No, its not wrong to try and tie it to something higher. But it does seem that when we can state why we think its "moral" without the tie into the divine, they seems to be "true" under more conditional changes.
I'm not interested in speculating about morality among reptiles and ducks.
The point he is making is that some animals have behaviors that are similar to ours. Well, I guess it would be better stated that ours were built on top of theirs. So some morals (actually behaviors) are coded in.
And why is it that you think other animals are irrelevant to understanding ourselves? You think humans aren't earth animals?
Man has enough trouble interpreting human behaviors and relating those behaviors to morality and spirituality. Focus on man, then when you have that figured out, worry about morality among rabbits.
Maybe I would use the term "conditional" over subjective. "Objective", as in some things our species just shouldn't do is ok in a general sense to me.
Some is coded in and some is etched in by experience. No, its not wrong to try and tie it to something higher. But it does seem that when we can state why we think its "moral" without the tie into the divine, they seems to be "true" under more conditional changes.
Morality is not divine, any more than walking, talking, eating, breathing are divine. You could say everything is divine, but then "divine" would not mean anything.
I'm saying it was a mistake to connect morality and religion, based on a misunderstanding of "the bible." And the connection has only become stronger.
The Old Testament is what remains of the written records of an ancient civilization, including history of varying degrees of accuracy, mythology, philosophy, religion, moral and legal codes, politics, war, etc. So our culture decided ALL of that fits into the category of religion? Just because all the various books have been collected into one "bible?"
And it's bad and it's wrong to think this way. It cuts the mystical heart out of religion, and replaces it with something ordinary.
And it's why modern humans NEVER talk seriously about magic. And why we think "spirituality" is all about being a "good person." (Even though, of course, no one bothers to say what a good person is, because we're just supposed to know, even though obviously we DO NOT know).
Morality is not divine, any more than walking, talking, eating, breathing are divine. You could say everything is divine, but then "divine" would not mean anything.
I'm saying it was a mistake to connect morality and religion, based on a misunderstanding of "the bible." And the connection has only become stronger.
The Old Testament is what remains of the written records of an ancient civilization, including history of varying degrees of accuracy, mythology, philosophy, religion, moral and legal codes, politics, war, etc. So our culture decided ALL of that fits into the category of religion? Just because all the various books have been collected into one "bible?"
And it's bad and it's wrong to think this way. It cuts the mystical heart out of religion, and replaces it with something ordinary.
And it's why modern humans NEVER talk seriously about magic. And why we think "spirituality" is all about being a "good person." (Even though, of course, no one bothers to say what a good person is, because we're just supposed to know, even though obviously we DO NOT know).
Man has enough trouble interpreting human behaviors and relating those behaviors to morality and spirituality. Focus on man, then when you have that figured out, worry about morality among rabbits.
Understanding the behaviors of animals is aiding in interpreting behaviors in humans.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
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.
