NOPE!FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Jul 03, 2020 9:23 am"Morality-proper" is an artificial creation you made up because actual morality - the thing we actually have - doesn't operate on a factual basis. You are not explaining the factual basis of actual morality with any of this, and your manufactured "morality-proper" is simply an admission of failure with reagards to morality as it actually is.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Jul 03, 2020 5:44 amI had stated 'morality-proper' is dealt via the Moral Framework and System which generate specifically moral facts.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:47 am
This is why your description of morality does not cover the actual thing, it's a substitute, or at best a minimal subset of the proper thing.
You can take a nasy vegan paste and make fake bacon out of it and call that "Bacon Proper", but it's still a shit and insubstantial alternative to the actual thing. Just calling it "proper" does nothing to change the fact that it is visibly inferior and fake. The same goes for all of your utterly shit "proper" alternatives. Your "philosophy-proper" is fake sad and usless, your "morality-proper" is hopelessly inadequate.
If you want to base morality on fact, use actual morality. If you can't do that, quit lying to yourself about whatever fake substitute shit you can do being "proper"
At present I am doing a survey of the 'definition of morality' and cannot find anything definitive.
Morality is a very loose term which is not well defined and is mixed up with 'Ethics' by many. This is why I have to use 'morality-proper' to reflect the real function of 'what is morality' that is ongoing in the human brain.
There are loads of research on this, here is one example among the many;
- Yale Psychology Professor Paul Bloom finds the origins of morality in infants
Morality is not just something that people learn, argues Yale psychologist Paul Bloom: It is something we are all born with.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... of-babies/
See this OP of mine,
- What is Fact
Morality-proper is actual morality that is existing as real in operation within the brain of humans, thus there are real moral facts [states-of-affair] as justified via empirical evidence supported by philosophical reasoning.
The Platonists, the theists claimed theirs are real morality but without any grounded justifications.
Your supposedly 'actual real morality' is very relative and ungrounded, thus it could be evil laden, like the "Morality" of Islam.
As I had stated what is 'real morality' to you could easily be evil laden when you don't have grounds to justify 'your morality' is sound and positive for the well-beings of individuals and humanity.
You are merely making noises above.That isn't how it works. Moral realists like you feel the need to make morality some neat and tidy thing, with factual answers available for every question.
The underlying rationale for moral anti-realists such as myself is that this is an attempt to see patterns in chaos.
The history of our moral interactions within others, if you look at it descriptively, is largely a matter of us (the insiders in any particular case) extending the scope of our moral concern very slowly. Couple of hundred years ago, people like you and Henry said moral concern for slaves was misplaced, they didn't qualify in just the same way you both deny it for animals today.
Seeing patterns in chaos without any grounding will end up with more chaos and promoting more evil.
How do you justify morally why it is morally wrong for you to kill and rape your kin or anyone?
You have not addressed my question, i.e.
"justify why it is moral when you and other humans are killing so many living things from non-human species, e.g. viruses, bacteria, one-cell living things, insects, fishes, etc."
where do you draw the line?
'They' ?? surely you are not referring to living non-humans.So you say, buy they say moral fact and their moral fact is just as credible as yours.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Jul 03, 2020 5:44 am When you take antibiotics you are also killing tons of good symbiotic bacteria in your lower intestines, how do you justify that morally in terms of your idea of morality?
Note the extreme of the Jains who covered their mouth just in case they kill any insects that fly into their mouths - this is stupid altruism.
As for the Jains, they don't have any grounds other than promoting empathy and compassion to the extreme and blindly which is irrational, unwise and stupid.
This how [..I mentioned somewhere] a few stupid men [altruistic full of empathy and compassion] died trying to save a dog in a stormy sea.