World Religions

I don’t really have a purpose behind this blog aside from ethical argument. Usually my posts are literature or film inspired, but not today. I just feel argumentative and obstinate today. Thinking back on some of these ethical rules we learned from various philosophers, I never really stopped to realize how vague and general they are. Sure they are supposed to be adaptable to situations, but being unyielding isn’t so bad either. An example I would like to use is Kant’s rule of “ought implies can”. This very well may be true, but does can imply should. This rule assumes that the person is thinking I ought to help that person. But thats really not how most people think. Most are I ought to kill him for that, or thoughts of revenge along those lines. Humans are basically immoral, and most of are thoughts really are not about others, so if ought implies can, we really should hold back whenit comes to this. Rules such as the aforementioned should be limited further, to allow less breathing room for those who would take such phrases and use them to justify less pleasant actions. Same with the Golden Rule, treat others the way you want to be treated. Somethings, rare as they are, like Sado-masochism really ought to be exempt from such all encompassing rules. This rule also implies an ideal society, where everyone follows said rule, not one imperfect as ours what with criminals and the like. Maybe we should just do away with such moral rules and stop listening to others for moral advice.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009 at 11:37 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.