it is not even true to call them "traditional moral standards",
Neo, you and I might as well be on different planets in this discussion. Once again you respond as though I don't understand that, in your scheme, standards evolve. And respond that way, to boot, to a post in which I said that I understand that. <g> I understand your point about how we are socialized and I agree with you. We would be socialized much the same way if our culture, by tradition, operated in my scheme rather than your scheme. I understand, at least generally, how socialization is altered under your scheme. And I understand your frustration at having to repeat yourself.
When I said "traditional moral standards" I was referring to your scheme as distinguished from my scheme, the self-interest scheme, not about the details of change within your scheme. I have been referring to your scheme as moralism for lack of a better label in contrast to my self-interest scheme, which does not concern itself with what is moral, with duty, or most of the other components of your scheme. It's a different paradigm.
During the course of this discussion, I have had an opportunity to focus once again on moralism vs. self-interest. I haven't really done that for forty years, since I rejected moralism in favor of self-interest, so it was about time. I appreciate the opportunity although I'm disappointed that we aren't able to play with it more. Maybe we talk past each other because I like sci fi and you're firmly planted in tradition. We've run into this kind of impasse on other issues. C'est la vie. |
