It doesn't make any sense....(but that's not a big deal, it's the understanding that counts). The premise that morality requires a "code of conduct" needs to be proven. Some people do things that are not set to any "code" that originate from their own ideas. Some people think things and it is not considered any form of "conduct" per se. ie: like thinking about one's grandma or whatever. It's good for oneself spiritually perhaps to be mindful of another's needs. Morals aren't bad...it's bad religions that abuse the ideas and concepts and label them as "moral" that are. The ones that push exact codes on everyone so it's backwards reason or post ergo.... Just because some morals are enforced codes of conduct does not make morals themselves something to reject. Why not morality or "ethics" etc. Some "morals", it could be argued are proven perhaps by the older and wiser but some might say that's not the case and just assume, in a kind of paranoia that it's all just manipulation. A really wise person doesn't react so quickly and broadly to this kind of idea.
Morals are fine. Some religions might be fine in some ways and some would be nearly indefinable like Taoism which has a code of no codes. What about those?
30 Oct 2005, 6:10 pm
