3
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 103:
Line 103: + + + + + + + + +
Debate:Can any man live without some code of morality? (view source)
Revision as of 18:07, December 3, 2009
, 18:07, December 3, 2009→Yes
:Horace, why does non-existence of God imply non-existence of absolute values? --[[User:Andy|Andy]] 12:32, 17 November 2007 (EST)
:Horace, why does non-existence of God imply non-existence of absolute values? --[[User:Andy|Andy]] 12:32, 17 November 2007 (EST)
===Semantics===
The debate question "Can any man live without some code of morality?" is more of a discussion topic that a debate question. That being said, I will play the game and treat this actual debate:
I believe that any resolution to this debate would depend very heavily on the semantics. A "code" of morality denotes text, or minimally, language so specific that is could be dictated and recorded as text. So, if one admitted that the moral rules do not need to be codified, one would have to conclude "yes". Also, if one admitted that any man "lived" before written language, one would have to either conclude "yes" or hold that men are no longer as able as their predecessors.
The next word in the question that is critical to the debate is "without". The semantical question is 'What would be considered "with" a code?'. My best take on this is that 'with' implies that the written text be available to the man as a reference. Even if the man cannot read, it could still be "with" him if there were others that he could task to read it for him. But this may be too loose an interpretation. Wouldn't "with" also imply that the man considered the code to be of some positive value and be willing to conform at least some of his behavior to it?
Although the word "live" is also critical to the debate, I do not see it as being as pivotal as it may first appear. As "live" is defined, there is this "spiritual processes" requirement which itself begs for definition. Otherwise, one can conclude "no" simply by asserting that the required "spiritual processes" is something that evaporates without codified morality. I suspect that most people who would tend towards a "no" response, would also view all "spiritual processes" as being quite hardy - even to the point of being immortal.
== Yes and No ==
== Yes and No ==
The question is whether it is possible to live without a moral ''code''. Absolutely. On the other hand there is the question of whether it is possible to live without ''morality''. I would say no. There are serial killers and people who do many evil things, but not living morally is different from living without morality. People cannot necessarily explain their morality; people may claim they have no morality; they may even believe it: that does not mean they are right. --[[User:Andy|Andy]] 12:30, 17 November 2007 (EST)
The question is whether it is possible to live without a moral ''code''. Absolutely. On the other hand there is the question of whether it is possible to live without ''morality''. I would say no. There are serial killers and people who do many evil things, but not living morally is different from living without morality. People cannot necessarily explain their morality; people may claim they have no morality; they may even believe it: that does not mean they are right. --[[User:Andy|Andy]] 12:30, 17 November 2007 (EST)