Author:
Finding the answers
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 21:39:30 06/22/01 Fri
In reply to:
An Atheist
's message, "Great Questions :)" on 13:44:28 06/21/01 Thu
Thanks, a lot of things make more sense. I can see how even thinking of doing something bad, or acting "immorally" (there's the word I needed!) may put you in a moral dilemma, and you can either act or not act. Being put in the situation is out of your hands, but acting on it is within your control.
As for the degrees thing, I like that example. It is a great way to see morals relative to people, yet absolute in their relation to the Moral Effort principle. What if instead of three different people with different backgrounds, you consider like people. Maybe you have two guys that are selected as "designated driver." They both like drinking, but know they shouldn't. One completely resists temptation while the other just mostly resists, maybe having only a drink or two. They both made the decision to exert moral effort, but are the particularities of their actions also within their control?
I might see this wrong, but it looks like it could only be seen that that guy who had only a little to drink either did or did not exert moral effort. If he did and then later got in a car accident, couldn't he be held morally responsible for drinking when he wasn't supposed to? If he did not, then was his attempt to exert moral effort something that wasn't in his actual control? He went against his desires so it was his doing, but yet he didn't quite make it.
I am sure I am just getting lost in the clear cut nature of absolutes, but if you feel like it, let me know what you think. Thanks again!
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
|
Feedback: 