Philosophy is the Talk on a Cereal Box -Monday, February 16, 2004 -6:05 pm-
Beth and I were, as usual, arguing today. This time it was based on The Political Compass thing I blogged about earlier. As usual, we didn't get anywhere with it and failed to do anything other than, well, nothing. She blogged the text of our IM conversation, so I'm not going to repeat it. It amazes me what the two of us get into. I start taking up astoundingly hard line positions that, while actually reflecting what I do believe in, are more extreme than I am (which is hard to do, mind you). I do believe that your morality and your attempts to follow it are what make you a good or bad person. However, I'm not going to personally condemn someone for having an idea I don't like. If they started enforcing that idea on others, well, then we're gonna have a rumble. I also think I stated my position on charity wrong. I don't think people should feel obligated to give to others, I think that the desire to give should be intrinsic.
I keep flipping back and forth on what the source of morality is. I definitely believe that a moral system stems from something other than a god. A moral system can be derived in the absence of religion and because the god/insert-random-holy-book-foo says so is not a valid basis for a moral system. I also totally disagree with Absolute Moral Relativism because it can be used to justify things such a slavery and genocide. I think this leads me to the conclusion that there is some absolute moral standard. Saying that makes me very uncomfortable because it means there's a possibility for condemning other people and restricting their freedom. At the same time, there has to be something that clearly says, "Bad despot! No biscuit!" when someone starts killing all the people who butter the toast on the top. I'm left with the desire to come down hard on those who infringe upon the rights of others and not knowing if thinking that way make me one of them. This is definitely, for me, an unsettled, and unsettling, issue.