Different moral standards (was : On the other hand)

[Geoff Bannister]

No: HPFGUIDX 93152

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> Geoff said :
> 
> > As a Christian, I believe that there are moral absolutes
> 
> Del replies :
> 
> I'm a Christian too, but not everyone is. And even as fellow 
> Christians, it is possible we don't have exactly the same moral 
> absolutes.


Geoff:
That is a contradiction in terms. An absolute is an absolute is an 
absolute. What is an absolute in France is an absolute in the UK is 
an absolute in the US.


> Geoff said :
> 
> > Jesus was asked on one occasion about the great commandments and 
> > he distilled them into two. (...) the second is to love your 
> > neighbour as yourself.
> >
> > Some readers will doubtless disagree with me over the first but 
> > the second is in many ways the mortar of society and we can only 
> > get this one to work if we agree on the fundamental structure of 
> > society.
> 
> Del replies :
> 
> I must respectfully disagree. I just have to look around me to see 
> that most people, Christian or not, don't care about loving their 
> neighbours. They want to be loved, but they don't care about 
loving. 
> Big difference. It's always "me first". Just like the Dursleys. The 
> only true mortar of society that I can see, so far, is that 
everyone 
> is looking for their own fulfillment, in their own way. 


Geoff:
I don't think this is the true mortar of society because what you are 
describing is a phenomenon which ultimately threatens to undermine 
society. It is the "I'm all right Jack" approach and the 
materialistic attitude of governments such as the "enterprise 
culture" of Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s (which preached that 
success was two cars outside a lavish house, green wellies, a child 
called Crispin and a dog called Tebbitt) that has eroded the 
traditional links of society and rubbished the spiritual element of 
life - spiritual in its broadest sense in this context.

The problem facing the Dursleys is the same which faces people in the 
real world who try to say that we can have different moral stances. 
If we take this view to its logical extreme, then anyone can hold any 
view and argue that it is right because it is their view of morals. 
we have to accept that anyone can claim that their interpretation of 
life represents their stance.....

Nazis could argue that the elimination of Communists, the killing of 
people of Slavic descent and the Holocaust were quite in order 
because they believed that this was a perfectly correct moral 
attitude.

Ian Huntley could argue that it was quite alright for him to abuse 
and murder the two girls at Soham because he felt it fitted his own 
moral standpoint. A paedophile could argue that their abuse of 
children was quite in order because they saw nothing wrong with it 
within their own moral code.

I apologise if these ideas are anathema to some readers but they are 
the logical conclusion of assuming that you can have a "free market 
economy" in moral views. Either you have absolutes or you have the 
mish-mash of anyone's choice of a moral pick-and-mix.

We see this in the Wizarding world in the long discussions we have 
had over the question of pureblood versus half-blood and mudblood 
where folk such as Voldemort (who, in the same way that Hitler was 
not German and did not meet the ideals he laid down for the 
Herrenvolk himself, was not a pureblood) and purebloods such as 
Lucius Malfoy presume that they can consider themselves to be above 
the rest of wizarding society and assume a moral ethic which includes 
the ethnic cleansing of lesser beings.


> Geoff said :
> 
> > Yes, but we are human beings, with consciences and self-
awareness -
> > dare I say made in the image of God - and not animals acting by 
> > instinct.
> 
> Del answers :
> 
> I've read some articles on human biology that say exactly the 
> opposite. Some scientists truly seem to believe that *everything* 
in 
> human behaviour, including love and compassion, can be explained by 
> either biology or social strategy.
>

Geoff:
Hm. I find it difficult to believe that biology or social strategy 
make me prefer walking to being a couch potato or preferring 
raspberries to bananas. I am sure there are many of our posters who 
will agree with me that we are humans created by God while some may 
not go all the way with me but still accept the idea of a higher 
being rather than suggesting we are a random error in the fabric of 
the universe.

OK. Having dropped the feline well and truly in the middle of the 
avians, I shall retire behind the battlements with my bow and arrow 
at the ready.