Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Praxus
The law of identity, as has been said before states that something not only has an identity but that something can not be what it is not. This means that man has a specific identity. Something that differentiates it from all other living things, and inanimate matter in general. So what it is it that man possesses that other living things do not possess? The answer: a volitional and rational consciousness. Man does not have instincts, we have to chose among options, which leaves open the possibility that we may chose incorrectly. Since we are all alive and we wish to remain so, we need a code to live by. A code that promotes our own lives. Since the law of non-contradiction tells us that we can not both be acting morally and immorally in the same respect and at the same time, a single act can either be life affirming, or self destructive.
This is the foundation of morality, as you can see, what is life affirming is objective. It has nothing to do with what we think is life affirming, but with what truly is.
|
I very much disagree with this. Saying something "can not be what is not," is just a tautology. Of course that's true, a rock is a rock. "Law of identity" sounds good, but doesn't really advance our debate.
I don't think man is at all different from inanimate matter. There is only matter and energy. 'Animate' refers not to fundamental difference in constitution. 'Animate' only helps scientists group certain kinds of reactions, for instance the neurological reactions and cellular respiration that make up the human body.
The human body, as decades of scientific research has confirmed (and let's momentarily assume we have the ability to know things) is made up protons, electrons, and neutrons just like everything else. I don't see where you inject the difference between humans and the rest of matter.
Man does have instinct, try the sex instinct. Its hard to rationalize that desire except that its essential for the preservation of the species and has thus become an instinct. Humans across the board show a real susceptibility to this desire, and that leads me to believe its not just a decision (assuming we have free will anyway) and is instead an instinct. If you want more of my thoughts on the matter, I'm happy to oblige.
Humans also pull away from something that is burning them, run away from danger, flinch at loud noises, and will try to find food an shelter. Humans run on instincts. Indeed, looking at our brains, the prefontal cortex and other parts of the brain that determine rationality and personality are new compared to the more primal brain stem (which controls many of the instincts I'm talking about). Man is still firmly in control of his animalistic past.
Only some morality promotes life. Its hard to see how Catholic celibacy promotes life, or Islamic suicide bombing. It seems to me a lot of morality just keeps people under control and makes them more easily controlled.
You say humans are distinguished by a rational consciousness. I think most morals are irrational products of emotion and sentimentality (just like religion).
What is rational to me, may sound fascist to you.
Finally, I'd like to see some sources on the "Law of Non-Contradiction." That sounds like metaphysics to me.
All the same, glad to continue the discussion.