At 02:37 PM 24/05/99 -0500, TheHermit wrote:
>Morality can only exist with an external reference. Otherwise you are simply
>playing with references, and as each person's "morality" is equally valid,
>the word is meaningless. As there are no external references, the concept of
>morality is only a convenient myth; a legal and social fiction designed to
>facilitate control of the unthinking.
>
>On the other hand, there are ethics, which are far more interesting, and
>when valid, ultimately derive their justification from genetics.
That's pretty much the same distinction I hold between morals and ethics (i.e. memetic - genetic). Just one question: Morality _does_ exist, and the external reference is the specific culture within which it resides, and from which it derives validity.....? Unless you meant "absolute" instead of "external", or unless, by "external", you meant external to the culture which contains the moral code? Maybe I just have a hard time with the particular use of terms such as "fiction", "illusion" and "myth" on this list........
Dan