on 10/13/00 13:18, David Pearson at [log in to unmask]
wrote:
> As for the shark - when it comes to what sharks do, I think ethics is
> simply irrelevant. They can't think or know about right or wrong (I
> assume!), so they can't *do* right or wrong.
Critical words: "I assume!" Quite to the contrary there is a great deal of
evidence that animals lead moral lives; now when I say this, I do not mean
they live by the moral code of the Bible Belt. I mean they _do_ distinguish
between right and wrong. For a carnivorous animal (dogs, cats, etc.), the
set of morals they consider are quite different from the ones we consider.
Monogamy seems to be the best lifestyle for the human species for many
various practical, emotional, and other reasons; therefore adultery has
serious moral import. Multiple partners doesn't carry the same moral import
as for other species, for a different set of practical and emotional
reasons.
I have often heard folks say things like, "Well, it is our duty, being the
only species that has self-awareness..." This is right up there with
"(animals/sharks) can't think or know about right and wrong..." I would be
supremely amazed if you could show me a shred of evidence to this affect.
Adam
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|