|
More seriously, (well, SLIGHTLY more seriously) what I think this or any other morality question comes down to is internal consistency/lack of hypocrisy. Every individual knows what they want- food, shelter, not to be hit in the head. I know i don't like being hit in the head. From what other creatures tell me and how they act, they don't like being hit in the head either. If its wrong to hit me in the head, then its wrong for me to hit them in the head for the exact same reason, because Beings A and B share a will and a desire.I agree. My point is that this internal consistency/lack of hypocrisy is necessary in order to maintain a functioning society. And that the benefits of a functional society outweigh the detriments. Thus it has a reason.
It has a result. But just because something has a result doesn't inherently mean that the result is the reason for it in the first place. (It could be the reason - but not inherently.)
Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne
|
Societies have managed for hundreds if not thousands of years based on entire heaps of hypocrisy: raiding, slavery, and wars of acquisition. I don't even know if we have a society where internal consistency/lack of hypocrisy has actually existed, much less that its necessary.
I am saying this internal consistency/lack of hypocrisy is the basis upon which societies are built as they engender trust and a society cannot exist without a certain level of trust between it's individuals. Absolute internal consistency/lack of hypocrisy is not necessary for this, but it is impossible with absolute inconsistency/absolute hypocrisy.
Compare the number of times you haven't seen someone kill someone else to the number of times you have and you will see that there is far more internal consistency/lack of hypocrisy there than isn't.
I submit that the internal consistency/lack of hypocrisy in society is so prevalent that we only notice it when it's not there.