"The nature of Human Beings is bound in the morality of right and wrong and so there is an 'ought to' aspect of what we choose to do."
>>>What are you talking about???
The statement is a response to a question, so it's talking about that question:
>>>"How do you get from what is TO what OUGHT TO be? If that's the case how can anything ever be right or wrong? "
That particular truism was a prefaced with the condition of nature being set (unchangeable).
"Nature is SET, as far as I know, for each type of creature and the Universe at large; while there is nothing to do about nature except to live out our time and adapt to circumstances as best we can. The nature of Human Beings is bound in the morality of right and wrong and so there is an 'ought to' aspect of what we choose to do."
It was actually a pretty good question. It's too bad the author didn't have sincere intentions in exploring the topic. The question itself could drive tremendously interesting discourse, IMO.
Few questions are as deserving. 'What if?' is another great one since it drives all imagination, inquiry, paths to discovery, hope, and enthusiasm. 'Why' and 'Why not' are definitely equal to that one.
The nature of human beings is bound to the morality of right and wrong, there can be no doubt. The evidence is every intelligent human being who was ever born expresses a sense of the morality of right and wrong, where this sense drives their choices with regards to what ought to be. When they choose according to their sense of what is right, they experience positive self regard. When they choose according to their sense of wrong, they experience regret in one form or another.
Even as your recent 'Ought to be' statement...
"My recommendation to you and DAK and LESS is a Diamond Willow Wizard Staff--and a KAYAK...and maybe a few books..." |
