Taz
Gold Member
- Jul 8, 2014
- 22,876
- 2,119
- 190
- Banned
- #21
Two of nature's standards are homosexuality and transgendering, and have useful outcome, to use your phrase. So why are you against them?Standards are not subjective. They exist for a reason. Standards are absolute, not relative. When society normalizes its deviance from those standards, predictable surprises will occur. That is how you can know that an absolute standard does exist. Outcomes.Morality is subjective, as you might think something like gay sex is immoral, but others don't see it that way, and nature has too many examples of homosexuality and transgendering to mention. But I'm sure that you still think that you're on the moral high ground on this matter.Virtue is the greatest organizing principle. When people behave virtuously, predictable success will NATURALLY follow. When people behave without virtue, predictable failures will NATURALLY occur.
Man is born with the ability to know right from wrong and when he violates it, rather than abandoning the concept, he rationalizes that he did not violate it. Men don't do evil for evil's sake, they do evil for the sake of their own good. So from this we can know that man prefers good over evil.
So how can we know if we are truly doing good or doing evil and rationalizing that we are doing good? The answer is simple... outcomes. Moral laws are not like physical laws. When you violate a physical law, the consequence is immediate. Not so for moral laws. The consequence of violating a moral law is not usually immediate, but since error cannot stand it will eventually fail. And when it does, if we are honest and paying attention we will come to know the error of our way and repent (i.e. transform). Thus evolving our consciousness (i.e. growing as human beings) and continuing our march towards the next leap in the evolution of matter.
So the answer to the OP is Nature. Nature determines the moral law.