T
Thinker_Doer
Guest
Poster @stpurl suggested that I could benefit fro reading Lewis’s book. I have read many apologetic books, but not that one. So I started it, and as I go on, I will make some remarks.
First, it is much too wordy. But that was the writer’s prerogative. Second, his idea of having a “uniform” human moral nature is obviously wrong. We certainly have a largely uniform biological nature. But there is no bridge from “IS” to “OUGHT”. We need to eat - this is uniform. But how to obtain that food is not uniform. So there is no uniform moral nature.
If we look at small children, who are not “polluted” yet with society, who simply express their “nature”, we shall see that they are “mean, little brutes”, who need a lot of “chiseling down” to change them into acceptable kids. We don’t teach them. we train them, just like any other animal. They don’t share, their main word is “MINE!!” when it comes to their possessions. They are jealous, vicious, they see nothing inherently wrong with torturing animals.
Of course there is nothing new about it. I and many others have pointed it out in many conversations. But the other side refuses to understand it. The say that we all have our uniform, good, caring, loving, moral nature, but it has been “warped” by the “fall”, and we need to re-learn how return to it. There is at least one problem with it. It assumes that the “fall” is more than just a story - and, of course there is no evidence for it. (If they believe it, it is their business. But they should not try to pass it on, as an ARGUMENT, even if we are on a Catholic board. After all we are on a Philosophy section, not in the theology section.) And they don’t see that their argument proves that there is no uniform moral nature - since it needs to be LEARNED! Which leads to…
Another point is that we all learn by example. In a society where everyone is naked, there is no “shame” associated with nudity. In a society where sex is normal, there is no “shame” with performing it in the open. Children growing up in a rural environment see nothing wrong with observing animals to copulate, and they learn to “play” with their little playthings, since it feels good. Kids who grow up in a white supremacist environment see nothing wrong looking down on others due to their skin pigmentation.
So much for the first chapter. I will keep on reading, and reflecting on the next ones. If you, or anyone else wishes to jump in, go ahead. But I will concentrate on the book.
First, it is much too wordy. But that was the writer’s prerogative. Second, his idea of having a “uniform” human moral nature is obviously wrong. We certainly have a largely uniform biological nature. But there is no bridge from “IS” to “OUGHT”. We need to eat - this is uniform. But how to obtain that food is not uniform. So there is no uniform moral nature.
If we look at small children, who are not “polluted” yet with society, who simply express their “nature”, we shall see that they are “mean, little brutes”, who need a lot of “chiseling down” to change them into acceptable kids. We don’t teach them. we train them, just like any other animal. They don’t share, their main word is “MINE!!” when it comes to their possessions. They are jealous, vicious, they see nothing inherently wrong with torturing animals.
Of course there is nothing new about it. I and many others have pointed it out in many conversations. But the other side refuses to understand it. The say that we all have our uniform, good, caring, loving, moral nature, but it has been “warped” by the “fall”, and we need to re-learn how return to it. There is at least one problem with it. It assumes that the “fall” is more than just a story - and, of course there is no evidence for it. (If they believe it, it is their business. But they should not try to pass it on, as an ARGUMENT, even if we are on a Catholic board. After all we are on a Philosophy section, not in the theology section.) And they don’t see that their argument proves that there is no uniform moral nature - since it needs to be LEARNED! Which leads to…
Another point is that we all learn by example. In a society where everyone is naked, there is no “shame” associated with nudity. In a society where sex is normal, there is no “shame” with performing it in the open. Children growing up in a rural environment see nothing wrong with observing animals to copulate, and they learn to “play” with their little playthings, since it feels good. Kids who grow up in a white supremacist environment see nothing wrong looking down on others due to their skin pigmentation.
So much for the first chapter. I will keep on reading, and reflecting on the next ones. If you, or anyone else wishes to jump in, go ahead. But I will concentrate on the book.
