Natural Law Morality

[GaryTaylor]

If you want me to respond to your posts, kindly write them in the normal way such that I can use the standard “Quote” system to respond.

I am not going to go through cutting and pasting just because you were too lazy to put your responses separately rather than embedded in my text, especially when I am responding on a tablet where cutting and pasting sucks!

If nothing else you are presenting what you wrote as my text.

That’s called honest communication. Why are your feelings important to anyone?

Wait, you mean there’s a code of conduct for private, behind closed doors and public and they differ. Or are we merely talking survival? Surely if I didn’t care what you thought about what I did behind closed doors, why would I care what you thought in public?

There’s a public higher moral code of conduct which is virtuous? What?

We should exhibit good typing-posting conduct ascending to some general higher code, but that code behind closed doors is independent of the greater good? Or it should kinda conform, as to how, that’s an individual choice? Lots a wiggle room there and if gets too wide in difference, well least your not in public, you can still wear that image in public.

I don’t know Dr, not that I disagree with what your saying about posting, just couldn’t help notice these different levels of morality public-private.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Common courtesy comes to mind, is that the natural law-morality-virtue too?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_courtesy

“The use of natural law, in its various incarnations, has varied widely through its history. There are a number of different theories of natural law, differing from each other with respect to the role that morality plays in determining the authority of legal norms. This article deals with its usages separately rather than attempt to unify them into a single theory.”

“According to Plato we live in an orderly universe.[7] At the basis of this orderly universe or nature are the forms, most fundamentally the Form of the Good, which Plato describes as “the brightest region of Being”.”

“Greek philosophy emphasized the distinction between “nature” (physis, φúσις) on the one hand and “law”, “custom”, or “convention” (nomos, νóμος) on the other. What the law commanded varied from place to place, but what was “by nature” should be the same everywhere. A “law of nature” would therefore have had the flavor more of a paradox than something that obviously existed.[1] Against the conventionalism that the distinction between nature and custom could engender, Socrates and his philosophic heirs, Plato and Aristotle, posited the existence of natural justice or natural right (dikaion physikon, δικαιον φυσικον, Latin ius naturale). Of these, Aristotle is often said to be the father of natural law”

Aristotle’s association with natural law may be due to the interpretation given to his works by Thomas Aquinas.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

Seems we roll this bad boy out whenever we need remind people we are human intellects of the highest order, at least when we want to be and it fits the occasion it seems.

Justice-Plato, Aristotle - Aquinas.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Common courtesy comes to mind, is that the natural law-morality-virtue too?

Perhaps so, insofar as it relates to common sense, which you would think is also what most people are endowed with by nature. But some with a greater amount than others?

Common courtesy seems tied to the Golden Rule, which also seems tied to the natural law and to the degree that it too is tied to common sense, or should be.