Changes

===Semantics===

===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:

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 as 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.

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.

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.

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.

--[[User:ScottB|ScottB]] 13:09, 3 December 2009 (EST)

--[[User:ScottB|ScottB]] 13:09, 3 December 2009 (EST)