Three Seas Forum

the archives

dusted off in read-only


On The Warrior Prophet posted 18 March 2004 in Philosophy DiscussionOn The Warrior Prophet by Replay, Auditor

I would have to say yes, all morality is just a social construct. However, that doesn't demean it in any way, to my thinking.

I think this is quite a common argument made by many these days, and it is very easy to see how people come to such a conclusion.

The problem comes when you try to lump all of morality (or value which morality is an extension of), into one group. Whereas in reality is does not really work like that.

By looking at morality from only a social point of view, you miss the morality/value of the intellect. And if you look at it from only an intellectual point a view, you can miss the social (and then theres the biological and inorganic etc).

For instance, theres been talk of whether animals have morality/value. Well, from an intellectual--and to a smaller extent, social--it may seem that they dont. But from a biological? Well thats another matter. Does not an animal do all it can to survive? And are not those who do survive those of biological higher value? I guess you could say that is what the whole survival of the fittest is about (though perhaps a better name would be survival of the best, or even survival of the highest value).

From this i guess you could say that evolution is just a movement to higher forms of value. Which brings up and interesting point, and that is that value is not a fixed thing (well, in the relative world anyway). I suppose this is the cause of most of the problems when you try to define it (i certainly had a lot of problems just typing out this small post on the subject). view post


The Three Seas Forum archives are hosted and maintained courtesy of Jack Brown