Quote:
Originally posted by asaris
Second -- but my point is just that the existence of different moral systems does not entail that there is not a correct one. In fact, I could draw evidence from the fact that under most moral systems, more or less the same things come out right or wrong.
|
And, in fact, a cultural studies approach proves this in a basic sense if you go back in time a few millennia. The combination of political power and religion has made this more problematic in the recent eras.
Quote:
|
Third -- Why do you assume a general utilitarian balance needs to exist? Aren't you just tossing objective morality away up front just to reintroduce it through utilitarianism in the back?
|
That is a good point. You can't say that as long as what is basically best for society plays out, then any morality structure accepted by an individual is ok.
Furthmore, I think it is problematic to say that "in this highly individualistic society, one has the right to choose ones own standard." There are moral structures in place that we are indoctrinated from our births. They appeal to our basic metaphorical sensibilities, and the possibility for an "average citizen" to choose something wildly different from another citizen is very low.
The example of porn merely shows that there is more than one metaphor that has been used to create moral structures that we use to base our moral decisions upon - but not really a high degree of personal potential to choose for one's self anything.
Sure, using moral structures and personal reasoning you can decide whether porn is a good or bad thing. But does that really mean that everyone is right regardless of their choice of moral structure?
At best, it means that the social consequences of some poor moral choices are limited.