This exchange sort of reminds of the story in the Bible, wherein a lawyer (scribe ?) asks Jesus what is the greatest commandment ( commandments, ten commandments, etc. stand for "morality" on this thread; what is the greatest principle of morality ?). Jesus gives the famous answer "love thy neighbor as thyself". On this thread that is something like saying the purpose of moral codes is to promote "kindness, empathy, forgiveness, and love", or a critique of many moral codes as they have actualized.
I don't see why we can't even take "love" in its several senses , so as to be both erotic and cerebral ( since we have no allegiance to Saint Paul). The "as thyself" clause is a limited guide to what "love" is. Treat people like you want to be treated.
"Morality" has been corrupted, in the way others have mentioned,including and especially by actual, historical Christianity. But , I think this law of love is a rational kernel we materialists can extract from the rest of the idealist, Jesus-legend, lets call it. Seems a step for solving the modern riddle of reconciling self-interest and group-interest.
Of course, Rodney King more recently asked "Why can't we all just get along ? "
Charles
From: andie nachgeborenen
What Dennis said. I was just using the word in a broad sense, to mean what we most ought to do and be, whatever that is. Incidentally I had a colleague at Ohio State, Richard Garner, who wrote a book, Against Moralirt, taking your line, saying that what we ought to do is to be nice to one another, but "morality" was a bad thing that actually got in the way of that. Despite a certain amount of New Ageyness, it was pretty good. You might like it, Doug. jks
--- Dennis Perrin <dperrin at comcast.net> wrote:
> > How is morality - a set of behavioral
> prescriptions - the same as
> > kindness, empathy, forgiveness, and love? The
> latter can be read as
> > forms of erotic feeling, which are often lacking
> in moralists.
> >
> > Doug
>
> We're getting stuck on a word -- morality -- which
> is most often used by
> those who seek not to liberate human feeling and
> help us evolve, but to
> control and use others for personal gain. I think
> the word is nearly useless
> now, given the amount of ideology weighing it down.
> I suppose kindness,
> etc., flows from our erotic sides, to a degree
> certainly, but I sense no
> disconnection from the cerebral and logical sides.
> In other words, we're
> hard wired for this, and the challenge is to fully
> realize this essential
> part of ourselves.
>
> DP
>
> ___________________________________