The History Book Club discussion

Janice George(JG) wrote: "I think morals may be based on what has been agreed upon that traditionally "works" for a society or culture, and there seem to be cross-cultural agreements on a few basic morals such as murder, in..."

So you agree that there is no philosophical basis for morality?

“If faith satisfied an emotional need, there was nothing more to be said about it, except that no one had the right to impose his or her religion on anyone else. Morality was another matter. Religion is personal and unconditional, but morality is social and conventional. Morals do not require philosophical grounding, and they can be imposed on other people, since they simply represent the rules a given society has found reason to enforce”" chap 9 part 2

Patricrk wrote: "Janice George(JG) wrote: "I think morals may be based on what has been agreed upon that traditionally "works" for a society or culture, and there seem to be cross-cultural agreements on a few basic...

So you agree that there is no philosophical basis for morality?..."

No, I can't make a flat statement like that, and I have not studied nearly enough philosophy or theology to know if that is true. But from a sociological or anthropological view, morality would definitely seem to be a product of society and culture.

However, there seems to be something in the human species that demands moral behavior, even tho' ideas of morality are generally so diverse between cultures. If we substituted "virtue" for "morality," would we still be talking about the same thing? I don't know if infants are born with a sense of either virtue or morality, but don't we each as individuals hope to achieve or develop a personal virtuous or moral character in our lifetimes, quite apart from what the society expects or judges as moral?

In fact, don't most people, regardless of the opinions of others or of their society, believe they have a moral character, even if it is their own personalized and "customized" concept of morality? Most people believe their actions are for the "good" (whatever their actions are), even if it means it is only for their own good. Sociopaths and psychopaths act out of a kind of perceived "rightness" or distorted morality. Even Hitler thought he was behaving in a righteous and moral way.

So perhaps there is a philosophical basis for morality, sourcing from some need in the human being. We are, after all, having a kind of philosophical discussion about morality right now :)

Empathy? Could it be inborn or did it develop during the "Axial Age as some historians theorize?

Becky wrote: "Empathy? Could it be inborn or did it develop during the "Axial Age as some historians theorize?"

Bingo. I had to look it up (I am often humbled by how much I don't know)... the Great Leap of Being (also thought to be the time of the birth of philosophy).

Here is an excellent review of the book The Great Transformation which discusses this idea -
http://www.bookslut.com/features/2006...

And here is an article from Psychology Today that offers some insight into what happened during the Axial Age --
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/t...

Thanks for the pointer, Becky.

by Karen Armstrong

Janice George(JG) wrote: "Becky wrote: "Empathy? Could it be inborn or did it develop during the "Axial Age as some historians theorize?"

Bingo. I had to look it up (I am often humbled by how much I don't know)... the Gr..."

Yes! I highly recommend it.

Janice, I too am humbled by how much I don't know.

Thanks for the information and comments Janice, Patricrk, and Becky. I've got so much more to learn, and The Metaphysical Club is a book that certainly reminds me of how much I have to learn with every chapter. I think I really need to read an elementary philosophy book to help me out with the basics.

Thanks to all for keeping the discussion going.