are there universal laws, which can explain morality?

Watch
This discussion is closed.
Blamps
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#1
discuss
0
Blamps
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#2
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#2
(Original post by Blamps)
discuss
Come on you theoretical physicists/meta ethical blah blah philosphers
0
Eru Iluvatar
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#3
Report 16 years ago
#3
Morality is not constant, so therefore neither can be any moral philosophy.
0
mikesgt2
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#4
Report 16 years ago
#4
No

It is true that there is some common moral ground all over the world as suggested by agreements over international human rights. These agreements could suggest some kind of universal moral sense of 'right' and 'wrong.' However, there is much evidence to the contrary. If there were a universal moral law, how do you explain moral dilemmas such as euthanasia, abortion, the Iraq war or even female circumscision. Within these debates there are people who have equaly strong convictions about the moral value of these actions. This seems to me to be a strong argument against the existence of moral law.

Whether we have a moral 'sense' is another issue, but my view is that there is no universal moral law.
0
old account
Badges: 0
#5
Report 16 years ago
#5
(Original post by Blamps)
Come on you theoretical physicists/meta ethical blah blah philosphers
Chaos theory can, sort of.
0
Blamps
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#6
(Original post by mikesgt2)
No

It is true that there is some common moral ground all over the world as suggested by agreements over international human rights. These agreements could suggest some kind of universal moral sense of 'right' and 'wrong.' However, there is much evidence to the contrary. If there were a universal moral law, how do you explain moral dilemmas such as euthanasia, abortion, the Iraq war or even female circumscision. Within these debates there are people who have equaly strong convictions about the moral value of these actions. This seems to me to be a strong argument against the existence of moral law.

Whether we have a moral 'sense' is another issue, but my view is that there is no universal moral law.
morality varies in its definitions....however, there is genetic evidence for the presence of good and bad morals..although whether a moral can be classed like that is open to interpretation
0
Blamps
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#7
(Original post by Blamps)
morality varies in its definitions....however, there is genetic evidence for the presence of good and bad morals..although whether a moral can be classed like that is open to interpretation
I had to discuss this in a law interview today :rolleyes: .......
0
mikesgt2
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#8
Report 16 years ago
#8
(Original post by Blamps)
morality varies in its definitions....however, there is genetic evidence for the presence of good and bad morals..although whether a moral can be classed like that is open to interpretation
I didn't say that we have no sense of morality. But having a sense of morality does not mean that it has to be an awareness of universal moral law. personally, I would concur with Freud's theory that our sense of morality comes from the internalisation of parental commands during childhood. Therefore, under this model, morality is not explained by universal moral laws.

Also, what would happen if you went round with a survey asking people all over the world their views on a number of moral issues. You would probably get vast differences. Surely this would be more evidence against universal moral law.

Furthermore, you should ask where this universal moral law would come from, God? Look at the Euthyphro dilemma, that presents a strong problem with universal law from God. Is universal law inherent in the universe? That idea seems dubious to me...
0
Blamps
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#9
(Original post by mikesgt2)
I didn't say that we have no sense of morality. But having a sense of morality does not mean that it has to be an awareness of universal moral law. personally, I would concur with Freud's theory that our sense of morality comes from the internalisation of parental commands during childhood. Therefore, under this model, morality is not explained by universal moral laws.

Also, what would happen if you went round with a survey asking people all over the world their views on a number of moral issues. You would probably get vast differences. Surely this would be more evidence against universal moral law.

Furthermore, you should ask where this universal moral law would come from, God? Look at the Euthyphro dilemma, that presents a strong problem with universal law from God. Is universal law inherent in the universe? That idea seems dubious to me...
hmm...where is Socrates?
0
old account
Badges: 0
#10
Report 16 years ago
#10
(Original post by Blamps)
I had to discuss this in a law interview today :rolleyes: .......
You failed the interview then mate :rolleyes:
0
Blamps
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#11
(Original post by Black Hawk)
You failed the interview then mate :rolleyes:
How did I fail? I was asked whether I thought it was an inherent feature of society over time in the development of law i.e universal morality...I argued the findings of geneoligists yet I said that greater weighting should be given to how cultural norms, values and beliefs have had a greater impact on the development of morality thus explaining the development of common law
0
Blamps
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#12
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#12
(Original post by Black Hawk)
You failed the interview then mate :rolleyes:
Law interviews are very much based on how one argues...many people can think they have failed yet still get in...you could answer a few questions yet if you show signs of rational and logical thinking, you can still get in...anyway, it was a mock
0
hildabeast
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#13
Report 16 years ago
#13
Check out Kant's categorical imperative argument....it is pretty convincing but not completely so.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
0
Leaby
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#14
Report 16 years ago
#14
(Original post by hildabeast)
Check out Kant's categorical imperative argument....it is pretty convincing but not completely so.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Kant's got some good ideas, I just don't think they work well with human nature.
There is definitely no universal moral code for every moral problem, but I think everyone would agree that, for example, killing someone for no reason whatsoever in a sane state of mind is wrong. It's just when it gets more complex than that that people's opinions will start to differ: for example, if someone killed a person in self-defence.
I also agree with Freud's view: one's morality comes from his or her conditioning in society.
0
mikesgt2
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#15
Report 16 years ago
#15
(Original post by hildabeast)
Check out Kant's categorical imperative argument....it is pretty convincing but not completely so.
I have not read any of Kant's books but I have studied his categorical imperitive in ethics lessons. As far as I was aware Kant did not present any real argument for the existence of a universal moral law. He just stated that he had a sense of moral law and made the assumption that everbody else felt the same. Well, I don't. What about everybody else?
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

If you do not get the A-level grades you want this summer, what is your likely next step?

Take autumn exams (141)
46.23%
Take exams next summer (46)
15.08%
Change uni choice through clearing (73)
23.93%
Apply to uni next year instead (31)
10.16%
I'm not applying to university (14)
4.59%

Watched Threads

View All