Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jul 18, 2024 1:42 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Thu Jul 18, 2024 4:54 am
There is no need for a "larger, transcendent moral system to be able to judge whether killing or non-killing is the "right" choice, .. ."
Sure there is. Think about it: if you have any two systems that claim to be "moral systems," you have to be able to choose between them. How are you going to do that? The only way you can is by invoking some kind of "higher moral system" that is capable of telling you.
So, for example, if the two systems are Communism and Democracy, how do you know which to prefer, which to support, which to implement?
The only way you can choose one is to have in your mind some axiom that differentiates the two in some important way, such as "The right political system is going to be the one that allows maximal freedom for the individual," or "The right political system will be the one that is most obedient to the collective good, as conceived by the Party."
But from where are you going to get that higher, decisive axiom? Which axiom are you morally obligated to follow, since they rationalize opposite choices?
Now you surely see the problem: to choose among moral options always relies on a higher axiom, some principle that transcends both of the alternatives, and allows judgment of them. But how do you derive such an axiom, since anything you suggest is going to be controversial?
The current moral systems we have at present are useful to some degrees but not highly effective, in that we still have 200,000 homicides per year and other acts of evil.
One of the most useful and optimal moral system at present is the Christian Moral System. This is why I had argued, theoretically, if the majority of humans were to convert to Christianity and
understand their contractual obligation to comply with the overriding pacifist maxim, i.e. love all including enemies, give the other cheek and the likes, I believe the number of homicides per year would be reduced to 50,000 the following year and continue to reduce.
It may not do much for slavery of all forms and other negatives.
But the above is only theoretical and not possible in practice for the future. This is because of the following limitations of the Christian Moral System;
1. It is grounded on an illusory God.
2. Humans are evolving to be more rational, thus cannot accept a fictitious God.
3. The trend is more humans are capable to modulating their
existential crisis more effectively, thus less dependent on the instant & easy relief of salvation from an illusory God.
4. Christianity as religion has its negative baggage.
That the increase in the number of Christian is stagnant at present is evident that Christianity is limited and not be able to influence the majority to convert to Christianity [given >2000 years to do so].
Since humans are evolving to be more rational with higher degree of critical thinking and along with the trend of the exponential expansion of knowledge, AI and technology, the way forward is a
secular rational moral system [no -ve religious baggage] that can be tested to bring the acts of evil down in the future.
This is the secular rational moral system I am proposing for the future, e.g. incorporating,
"Abortion is Not Permissible, Period!" as a standard and guide, while utilizing all our efforts [knowledge and technology] to reduce the number of abortion gradually to say 1000 per year in a future time.
All other listed evil acts will also be reduced expeditiously in the future.
This secular rational moral system is already executed in action subliminally and impliedly with significant result in term of slavery and other forms of evil [Pinker].
Thus what we need to do is to lay it out explicitly with assurance of its effectiveness.
