The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Philosophy
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Philosophy Religions, schools of thought, matters of importance and navel-gazing

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 11-10-2011, 02:28 PM   #20
DanaC
We have to go back, Kate!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 25,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by henry quirk View Post
In the sense that there is no absolute or universal morality to consult or rely on.

That is: I have a 'morality' that is idiosyncratic to me, based on my valuing of this or that, but that's just 'me'. I’m not arrogant enough to assume my way is the right way for any one else, or that my way has a root any place other than in 'me'.

#

"...collapse the numerous posts and thoughts..."

I did no such thing...I barely commented on any one's post (except for Dana's and JB's), beyond saying you lot are on target.
According to what measure? Whose target? Who made you lord high arbiter of what is or is not factually correct about morality?

All you've put forward is some airy-fairy pseudo-philosphical ramblings about how all morality is essentially a construct in our own minds. Well, whoop de frikken do. Hold the front page. Ain't nobody ever had that thought before. Your understanding of morality is just that. Your understanding. It is not for you to measure how correct the rest of us are.
__________________
Quote:
There's only so much punishment a man can take in pursuit of punani. - Sundae
http://sites.google.com/site/danispoetry/
DanaC is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:25 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.