Morality by Respect
I was thinking of answers to the question how do we know what is or is not wrong.
The idea was that it is based in respect. Respect for human kind, respect for god or gods, repect for authority. The list can go on. The point is it think we determine what is right or wrong by what we respect. I think it works better because it makes morals more personal wich make the unknown or unaccounted exceptions less likely to occur. Like many other theorys I have read.
Agree or not this is an idea and yes, I know we don't have a solid definition of respect
The idea was that it is based in respect. Respect for human kind, respect for god or gods, repect for authority. The list can go on. The point is it think we determine what is right or wrong by what we respect. I think it works better because it makes morals more personal wich make the unknown or unaccounted exceptions less likely to occur. Like many other theorys I have read.
Agree or not this is an idea and yes, I know we don't have a solid definition of respect
Comments (11)
? Frank Herbert, Dune
On the other hand, loving everybody may not be possible. Respect seems doable. We may not like someone for whatever reason but we can respect them nonentheless.
"different degrees and instantiations of empathetic tendencies lead to very different moral stances."
So, for example, psychopaths will have at least some very different moral stances than the norm, because empathy is instantiated very differently in psychopaths--that's one of the defining characteristics of psychopathy/sociopathy.
So the idea isn't that the fact that there's empathy leads to predictable moral stances. Empathy is realized differently in different people, in terms of degree, properties, etc.
If respect is to ground something as important as morality, it should be given a meaning undiluted by variables. Respect for this, respect for that, respect for the other, drains respect of its power. It becomes realistic to suppose morality may indeed be a matter of respect, if one respects a particular thing upon which morality may depend.
The course of human events does exhibit one condition under which respect is centralized, and that is for the law. If that is true, then, in the case of morality, the centralized respect would be for a moral law. So, with respect to the OP, yes, the moral by respect is at least reasonable.
What the moral law may be, on the other hand, is not, and cannot be, given by the agreement that morality by respect is reasonable.
Secondly, no we don't all respect the law or criminals would not be a thing. The government dose want to dictate our morals but thay know there is a point where they can't cross without protests and/or a revolt. A revolt is a sign of disrespect for the government. So yes the law is one factor but not the only one.
I didn’t say, and certainly had no intention of implying, we all respect the law.
What makes you think the government dictates, or wants to dictate, the morals of its populace?