In a message dated 3/30/00 10:57:30 AM Central Standard Time,
pholden5@earthlink.net writes:
PLATT:
> As radical as the idea may seem, belief in a innate moral sense has been
> expressed by some of the world’s greatest philosophers including Buddha,
> Plotinus, Aristotle, Marcus Aurelius, Henry David Thoreau, Herbert
Spencer
> and William James. Darwin also believed that humans possessed an innate
> moral sense which separates us from the rest of the animals. But Immanual
> Kant, who many modern thinkers hold up as the last word in secular moral
> matters, claimed that belief in a moral sense was a fallacy. That most
> biologists today agree with Kant is hardly arguable. (Am I right,
Jonathan?)
>
> How many of us here in this group believe that our bodies, before sensing
> anything else, sense values? That the nature of our experience is
primarily
> moral?
JON:
I agree with Rick and Horse. Since everything is value, we must automatically
sense value first. The cutting edge of experience. Personally I've always
felt that I possessed an innate moral sense on a subliminal level.
I also would agree with Jonathan that many (or most) biologists and
scientists in general are not interested in philosophy or metaphysics and
have not read the works of the people you listed above. Metaphysics simply
has no practical role to play in the monotonous day-to-day work of biology.
It's probably slightly unfair of people to expect scientists to constantly
consider the metaphysical ramifications of their work. Because that's what it
is, work. Their job. We don't expect car mechanics to contemplate philosophy.
Jon
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:40 BST