S
stpurl
Guest
Really, but how did the ‘collective human experience’ ever come up with establishing a ‘standard’ to begin with?
Think about it. Killing is wrong. We have a lot of ‘situations’ where we can come around and say, "Well, it’s all right if you’re defending yourself’, but killing is wrong is so engrained that, again, the only way people excuse themselves is to say that 'well it isn’t really ‘killing’ in this case.
But, for individuals or even societies, why WOULD killing start to be considered wrong? Look how today we are always finding ‘excuses’ to say something isn’t really killing --do you think we are so different from the world’s 'first humans"? Why would the world’s first humans, who might have found killing very necessary (limited food supplies, danger to small groups of people, etc), somehow come up with a idea that killing was wrong, instead of an idea that killing was something that should be ‘safe, legal, and rare’, an act that could be morally good, neutral, or wrong, 'depending on circumstances"?
Think about it. Killing is wrong. We have a lot of ‘situations’ where we can come around and say, "Well, it’s all right if you’re defending yourself’, but killing is wrong is so engrained that, again, the only way people excuse themselves is to say that 'well it isn’t really ‘killing’ in this case.
But, for individuals or even societies, why WOULD killing start to be considered wrong? Look how today we are always finding ‘excuses’ to say something isn’t really killing --do you think we are so different from the world’s 'first humans"? Why would the world’s first humans, who might have found killing very necessary (limited food supplies, danger to small groups of people, etc), somehow come up with a idea that killing was wrong, instead of an idea that killing was something that should be ‘safe, legal, and rare’, an act that could be morally good, neutral, or wrong, 'depending on circumstances"?