Comments on The problem with self defining morality

Go to Religion in the Modern WorldAdd a commentGo to The problem with self defining morality

Yes Gome, you said it so beautifully. I fully understand you. Thanks.

posted by Bhaskar.ing on October 25, 2007 at 10:53 PM | link to this | reply

Bhaskar.ing - I've posted on that very subject in the past

One of my country's first nations, a tribe numbering about 3,000 at the time of the First World War was nearly completely decimated by the flu pandemic brought back from the trenches in Europe. They found themselves reduced to a few hundred but as that particular strain of flu virus was known for, it killed adolescents to the aged leaving very few people alive of child parenting age. They found themselves with one healthy young male and about 30 healthy young women. The village elders determined that monogamy was no longer relevant, the one male became the designated sire to restore the nation. A "task" he maintained until he was in his late 70's. I went to school with some of his children who numbered somewhere around 200 at the time. If you can imagine this arrangement was more than just frowned upon by the catholic church who maintained a mission in the area. They did everything they could to stop it on moral grounds.

Looking back on it so many years later, it all just makes perfect sense to me but was deemed completely immoral by a different society.   

posted by gomedome on October 25, 2007 at 11:36 AM | link to this | reply

Gomedome
What is moral for one society, belief systems and the like, can be quite immoral for another, and so 'can't comment' should be the moral, I think.

posted by Bhaskar.ing on October 25, 2007 at 10:30 AM | link to this | reply

.Dave. - I know what you mean
I can identify with that, I've been there, yep, I know exactly what you are saying.

posted by gomedome on October 25, 2007 at 10:22 AM | link to this | reply

sannhet - it certainly is relative and there is not one amongst us who has

the right to determine morality for the rest of us at their discretion.

Determining morality is a social collaborative effort. To brand someone as immoral simply because another person disagrees with their religious perspective is an avenue wrought with numerous dangerous pitfalls. To further attempt to accuse someone of being immoral for doing exactly as we are doing is simply hypocritical.

posted by gomedome on October 25, 2007 at 10:21 AM | link to this | reply

I mostly do. Sometimes don't comment as I always seem to be saying

exactly the same things:

  1. Good arguments
  2. I agree
  3. Finely structured writing

I sound like some kind of Yes Man. Ah well...

posted by _dave_says_ack_ on October 25, 2007 at 10:04 AM | link to this | reply

.Dave. - thank you and thanx for stopping in

posted by gomedome on October 25, 2007 at 10:01 AM | link to this | reply

Gome -
Morality is all relative, and I've got plenty of immoral relatives hanging around in my tree. . .

posted by sannhet on October 25, 2007 at 9:50 AM | link to this | reply

Strong arguments, Gome. Always a thought-provoking read.

posted by _dave_says_ack_ on October 25, 2007 at 7:39 AM | link to this | reply