Talk:Moral obligation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Philosophy WikiProject, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy and the history of ideas. Please read the instructions and standards for writing and maintaining philosophy articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | |
| Stub | This article has been rated as stub-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
[edit] Working area on urges and restraints
--- Begin working area container
[edit] Traditional sources
Moral obligations in the religions consist of positive duties and prohibitions, both. The two sides of moral obligation might be called 1) urges and 2) restraints.
- Religious organizations creating moral obligations. Churches, synagoges, and mosques creating laws based on "God said."
- Legal organizations creating moral obligations. Legislatures and courts creating laws based on the estimated effect that the law will have.
- Courts "at law" did not traditionally enforce mere moral obligations. But in some cases, equity enforced moral obligations, such as under an unjust enrichment or a promissory estoppel theory. [1]
- Work item. Expand Law of obligations page. Create the unjust enrichment page.
- Courts "at law" did not traditionally enforce mere moral obligations. But in some cases, equity enforced moral obligations, such as under an unjust enrichment or a promissory estoppel theory. [1]
- Sometimes Religious overlaps with Legal.
- Compare deontological ethics with teleological ethics. Britannica article. [2]
[edit] Modern evidence for genetic triggers of moral obligation
Apparently, there are genetic triggers for both urges and restraints of moral obligations.
The Harvard anthropologist Richard Wrangham has summarized the behavioral similarities in the urges and restraints on action between men and chimpanzees in his 1996 book Demonic Males. According to Wrangham, "Very few animals live in patrilineal, male-bonded communities wherein females routinely reduce the risks of inbreeding by moving to neighboring groups to mate. And only two animal species are known to do so with a system of intense, male-initiated territorial aggression, including lethal raiding into neighboring communities in search of vulnerable enemies to attack and kill. Out of four thousand mammals and ten million or more other animal species, this suite of behaviors is known only among chimpanzees and humans." [3]
[edit] Restraint from sexual relations among close kin
The Bible says, ... (give the Biblical discouragement of incest).
Chimpanzee communities ...
That is, chimpanzee females are under a genetic restraint to refrain from sex with family members. At puberty, a female chimpanzee normally migrates to the next community of males to live and mate.
[edit] Restraint from killing individuals in the same community
The Bible says, "Thou shalt not kill." And that commandment meant don't kill men in your own community. Regularly, God condoned or ordered the killing of men who were not relatives.
In comparing the DNA of the various animals on the earth today, many anthropologists have concluded that
[edit] Urge to raid the neighboring community to kill other males
[edit] Female restraint from competing for the hierarchy of governance
The Bible says, "Women be obedient to your husbands." And that moral obligation apparently has genetic origins from the ancestors of the chimpanzees.
[edit] Male urge to dominate females
Cite the low numbers of women in positions of authority, giving the National Legislature link [4]. Though it is more common for a woman to rise to alpha of the community than for a female chimpanzee to rise to be alpha of the community, the common trends of gender bias against females rising to become alpha of the community suggests that human bias against women is genetic in origin.
The evolutionary forces that adapted the bonobos to the ecology on the south side of the Zaire River apparently removed gender bias against women from bonobo genes.
Among bonobos, females form their own hierarchy of females which effectively neutralizes the power of males in the community. Observationally, when a male and female chimpanzee fight over food, the male wins. When a male and female bonobo fight over food, the outcome is about fifty-fifty.
[edit] Genetic mutations in bonobos that produce female equality
The bonobo female urge to unite to neutralize the power of the males in the community. Cite the observed political power and fruits of labor division.
--- End working area container ---Rednblu 08:24, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Nice! The only time the word "mutation" is used to describe an innate biological tendency is when that tendency is "female equality". Usually, I think "genotype" is the word, though I might be wrong. --RL
[edit] Scndlbrkrttmc
Moral Obilgation's Caption: Abortion Argument and The Individual Responsibilities
Is The Abortion Argument A Social Responsibility Argument or A Personal Responsibility Argument?:
From the files of Geo. E. Burks and the scndlbrkrttmc series.
06-07-04
Do The Land Of Free Choice Has Free Responsibilities?!
Perspective By Geo. E. Burks.
Did you notice the strong emphasis at the end of the following notice? Of’course you do!! This is a known part?! Did you notice the strong emphasis at the beginning of the following notice? Of'course, this is the most urgent need!?! Now, what the most important part of this notice?!!
FREE CONDOMS!!!
What people failed to see is how an unavoidable answer can be the #1 catalyst of its need. Its’ we ‘you know’ if we do see and we ‘you know’ if we do want. Blind for love is the lesser than lust for love and with this formula activated, my first thought is "do our youth know many one can get if X=free?"?!
Next up is responsibility?! Hmmm, this is complicated, lets see, does we encourage the activity that can bring a new variable of love into the formula?! I know that one could easily weight their future on a momentary discomfort in their present short lifetime, but it’s the integrated lesson in this experience that worries my future outlooks for our society like why X= a sound free?!
Definitely an errrrr right for the positive variable and that a sound full for err!!! The easy the feelings toward DE-FEAT-US outward, the more affirmed THIS-A-VOW-YOU- make as a future part from you as a waste of time for our positive effort?!?
We may be the land of free choice for many things including our future, yet these future, yet these future judgments lie in the hands of the values we have for the life our youth will lead. If these STUDENT OF LIFE are to learn from our youth, then we grant that precious freedom of choice to what is known for what their true worth of THE FETUS AND THIS IS A VALUE.
Imagine when the time comes when they will have carried on and find themselves surveying their charges, our youth. I fear that there will be too many viewing over this and thinking "I thought defeated these little things a long time ago." "It was free and easy!!?"
They would ponder this thinking "How can so many become to an age of my notice when during our times, life was so free and easy?!! Wait a minute, WE DEFEAT US?!?"
Without the values of the bundle of what the defeating us true values are, then how can the youth comprehend the singular act of love outside the singular variable that brought them out of our homes. If those daydreamer pondering failed to visualize the truth in these bundle of that kind of love. Well, one thing for sure, ‘Its was then and actually now its free and easy to see why.’ For the discomfort is still there when they took notice after the more experience view in looking at what's easy and free.
Now, try to find it and and if you do, then take care to grasped the complete responsibility of this. After all, love doesn’t come free and easy and its hard to keep and over-easily to destroy. Now why do you think that one of most common used words and easy word to define and find in one's life like responsibility is such a big word in actual being. You know why, because it ain’t free.
In this land of the free, some of these free things like rights and freedom, freedom of speech and Freedom of choice, if taken for granted will take a cancerous growth in a devaluing you in a DE-FET-US way. Ahhhh, another word called ADULTS is also one of those common words in the free world, see how small its is and this is attained for free and easily in being in any free country. So, to you, "you young adults, I am saying to even as the old softy, who will adhere to pro-life in my personal responsibilities, and I will support the pro-choice for my land of the bold and free, for I believe that the responsibility is as small as how big as one can be."
One can now look back to that first questions at the beginning of this article and listen to one self very carefully, for it is a tough one to redress and ask, "Why???" With the word ‘free’ and the emotions of a triple ‘exclam(!!!)’ set aside, the remainder of the expression in the notice is the most important part of that notice??!" Take look up there and answer this question to yourself in the place where all your responsibilities and being are growing!!!
[edit] Sources:
The Above Version Of The Article; "Do The Land Of Free Choice Has Free Responsibilities, By Geo. E. Burks/ttmc," Is An Edited Version And A Contribution To The Wikipedia Encyclopedia and References' Databases and Edited For That Criteria Of Use And Purpose Only.
georgeeddieburks.tripod.com/abortions_argument__rights_of_sexual_intercourse_and_societal_responsibilities.html
The API Version Can Be Viewed At The Address Given Above.
The text User:Scndlbrkrttmc inserted and I reverted[5] is released under the GDFL. I received a copy of this post by mail from the author's email address. --Zoz (t) 21:41, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
