@buffalobill90 Said
No, that's not what I'm suggesting. I'm saying that human morals are grounded in suffering itself. Nobody wants to suffer - in fact, every human action is essentially geared towards reducing suffering and maximising happiness. If nobody was capable of suffering, there would be no need for morality.
I don't agree. You are implying that humans entirely lack creativity, even if it is purely accidental. If that were the case, we would never have made any technological progress. In any case, everyone has a unique subjective experience of society, so although certain norms do prevail they are only the result of similarity of thinking rather than absolute consensus and conformity.
Y'no Buffalo, I wish you would actually decide which idea you are trying to sell as the grounds for morals, cause all this jumping back and forth from 'societal (reply43)' to 'suffering' leaves me feeling you are grasping for something that you are not sure of yourself.
'morals are grounded in suffering'
Now I find that idea very idealistic, but when I look around the world I wonder what moral (based on suffering) encourages humanity to spend trillions of dollars on space exploration or fashion, or private recreation,,, as opposed to solving problems of famine, war, and disease(massive suffering) in the third world. Do you think this contradicts your proposal (suffering) much, because historically, human behaviour verifies much the same.
Your statement 'every human action being geared towards reducing suffering and maximising happiness',, leaves me wondering if you would think the actions of Hitler, Pol pot, Stalin and other (human) examples like them, somewhat moralistic!!
Ok, nowhere do I imply humans lack creativity, how did you draw that one? Creativity is usually considered more the realm of the arts, not morals.
Morals are not responsible for guiding human technical progress,, this much is patently obvious if you decide to check some of the decidedly immoral progressions humans have come up with. EG mind altering drugs, the porn industry, atomic weapons, torture devices. Also as anyone knows, the Nazi's were probably the most technologically advanced state in the world at the outbreak of WW2 and they didn't win any awards for (advanced morals) did they.
Something else BB, (please don't take this personally, I'm refering to our discussions not 'You' ) I am always offering you real world examples with my arguements, "based on what humans actually do", so far what you are refuting it with something sounding more to me like idealism or relativism. I find it easier and more concrete to discuss what is, as opposed to what might be. Das'all for now... Hippie 8)