Abiogenesis, evolution and morality

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
My own, because it's awesome.

Buy me a drink?

Originally posted by DeepThought
I realise that this is a discussion between you and Kazet I'm butting into, but I think the following might add something. Bernard Williams was one of the, in not the, preeminent moral philosophers of the twentieth century, in his book he distinguishes between ethics and morality, and this is a distinction that may be relevant here:

Here and earli ...[text shortened]... and the Limits of Philosophy[/i] Bernard Williams, [b]Routledge Classics 2011 ed. p7

[/b]

The thing I wonder about when people run down this path of how this became thought of
as good or bad in any form, we first have to get to the place of any type of "notions" not
just the ethical ones are part of life's reality.

From a point of mere cause and effect due to chemical reactions is all life is than moving
to contemplation is a huge step for any life form at any level of awarness. When going
from simple chemical reactions how would this occur sure seems like a lot of required
levels of understanding would have to be reached first? There would never be a judgment
call made early on when just chemical reactions started life from non-life.

If new information is brought into play there would be no this is better than that so where
did any "notion" come from let alone the good and bad.

Originally posted by KellyJay
When going from simple chemical reactions how would this occur sure seems like a lot of required levels of understanding would have to be reached first?

What "levels of understanding" would have "to be reached first" for what precisely to happen?

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
What "levels of understanding" would have "to be reached first" for what precisely to happen?

To have a thought, to make a judgment call.

Originally posted by KellyJay
To have a thought, to make a judgment call.

"To have a thought, to make a judgment call" is a "level of understanding"?

Originally posted by KellyJay
From a point of mere cause and effect due to chemical reactions is all life is than moving
to contemplation is a huge step for any life form at any level of awarness. When going
from simple chemical reactions how would this occur sure seems like a lot of required
levels of understanding would have to be reached first? There would never be a judgment
call made early on when just chemical reactions started life from non-life.

The master of vagueness takes it to a new level.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
"To have a thought, to make a judgment call" is a "level of understanding"?

You think thoughts are without some level understanding, and judgment calls can be made without some level of understanding?

Originally posted by KellyJay
You think thoughts are without some level understanding, and judgment calls can be made without some level of understanding?

You think thoughts are without some level understanding [...]

Please rephrase this part of your question in English.

[...] and judgment calls can be made without some level of understanding?

Some level of understanding of what?

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
[b]You think thoughts are without some level understanding [...]

Please rephrase this part of your question in English.

[...] and judgment calls can be made without some level of understanding?

Some level of understanding of what?[/b]

🙂 I guess some level of understanding is required, you are living proof.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
My own, because it's awesome.

Agreed. Personal preference it is then.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Agreed. Personal preference it is then.

You don't have a preference for your moral code?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Agreed. Personal preference it is then.

Sure, but only if eye colour or sexual orientation is personal preference.

Originally posted by finnegan

There is no requirement for a moral code to be based on or produced by religion. That is only one of the avenues available and only one of the forms of morality encountered in studies of human societies.

Is an ethical sense or moral sense as a component of man's created being "a moral code based on or produced by religion?"

The law of gravity, for instance, works everywhere, not just in the physics department of a university. If an ethical sense is bestowed upon our created being, setting us as humans apart from other animals, is that "a moral code based on or produced by religion?"

It would be an internal moral sense whether or not individuals subscribed to a particular religion, if so. Right?

Originally posted by sonship
The law of gravity, for instance, works everywhere, not just in the physics department of a university. If an ethical sense is bestowed upon our created being, setting us as humans apart from other animals, is that "a moral code based on or produced by religion?"

Clearly not. You may believe that the law of gravity and morals come from God and thus your understanding of them may be part of your religion, but neither you, nor anyone else, would correctly say that the law of gravity was based on or produced by your religion.