quote:
Your Evidence: No country would declare genocide or reinstate slavery. Thus, human morality has increased.
My Evidence: Iraq War, Sweatshops, Corporations, Rwandan Genocide.
Yes, look at those. And EVERY single example there shows morality changing.
Of course you also throw in some totally unrelated items like Corporations which just shows you have no idea what a Corporation is.
But other than your tossing in nonsense examples, let's look at the list.
Many folk believe the Iraq War immoral.
Many folk believe sweatshops immoral.
Many folk believe Rwandan Genocide (and the fact that you brought up Rwandan Genocide simply shows how pathetically ignorant of current events you are) immoral.
The fact that there are folk who consider such things immoral proves that morality does change.
Those pieces of evidence were to expose the still immoral action of humankind today. I included those pieces to show Brian and Tazmanian Devil examples of the very things that they are saying don't exist, or are limited.
I included the word "Corporations" because they are behind much of modern day slavery today in "poor" areas of the world. I did not feel that an explanation was needed but it seems that your love for capitalism caused you to be outraged by that inclusion. It seems as if you don't want to believe that humans are no more moral than they were, as if you would like to remain ignorant to the fact that the world's popuation (majority) supports sweatshops, a lifestyle of wealthiness, etc.. For themselves to benefit. Humans are as unjust as they have ever been because human nature does not change.
The Rwandan genocide was included as well because Tazmanian Devil claimed genocide to be more limited today than it was years ago.
Of course little of this has to do with my real argument but were examples of how a simple counter-argument would run using historical examples to refute the historical examples given by those who believe morality has increased in the world. My real argument was that human morality cannot change.
You have taken three unrelated items and strung them together as though they were related.
Third to assert morality cannot change. How absurd. Not only does morality change, it is constantly changing. There is no universal and absolute morality and no one has ever been able to show such a thing exists.
There is a universal and absolute morality. You sir, are a Sophist! But don't worry, Plato warned me of you.
You are saying that no universal morality exists but fail to realize that if this is true then there is no "right" and there is no "wrong", and if that is true then there are no standards and humans would never feel guilt in living an unjust life. There would be no reason to act justly. There instead seems to be an absolute moral sense that is ingrained in all of us. A perfect morality. What is right and what is good. CS Lewis has demonstrated in "Mere Christianity" that an absolute morality exists. Plato's "Republic" is based on the premise that there is a perfect model for what is just and therefore moral.
This is the most important element to your post for me as it addresses my argument directly. First I will try to detail why Human Morality cannot change and why speaking of it and arguing in that way is absurd.
I never believed that humans were pre-disposed to a certain "nature", rather I had believed that humans were never to be defined and always moving in their thoughts and decisions. But it seems that the nature of humans has not changed, and will never change. Therefore I am attempting to prove that this nature
cannot change. This would lead me to a restriction that would inevitably entrap all humans into a meaningless sphere, a creation that is unable to escape itself. An absurdity at that. Humans have not one simple nature though. Humans can be good, they can also be unjust. The term "human nature" is itself a term of ignorance and oversimplification to the point of stupidity. I can see why you have disagreed with my points.
A man believes that men deserve to be put into slavery for his benefit as they would do all of his work for him.
Upon setting this into motion, he befriends the people whom he was enslaved.
He now believes slavery, in all aspects, is wrong.
His sense of morality has changed.
This brief story shows that a humans sense of morality can change.
But then why has human morality not changed? Why are there the same elements in an unjust society as there were in all societies to date? Why are humans the same?
Humans do not have a "nature". They are complex and have many natures. But the ridiculousness of this argument which I at first rejected (the argument between the likes of those who believe that morality has decreased and those who believe that morality has increased) is in it's ignorance to the way human morality has simply not changed. Humans are still mostly out for themselves, selfish creatures.
I apologize. The basis for my argument was not rooted in truth. I started with this absurd argument where I purported that human beings could not change their nature. They
don't normally change their nature, but they certainly can. Sorry to all of you, you were all right.
While I still believe that human morality
has remained the same, it was very stupid to say that it cannot ever change.
Ah I am left utterly confused at my own beliefs on what humans are. I will have to think this one over a great deal. It turns out that my argument was the one without thought.
So lame to admit defeat like this but its true, my argument was absurd. It defeats the plausibility of a Utopia which is disgusting. I went too far accidentally.
I guess the chatroom stuff was just some awkward crap. I don't get it, I thought I was on to something great.
Sorry.
™ Version 4.2
