|
myOtaku.com
• Join Today!
My Pages
• Home
• Portfolio
• Guestbook
• Quiz Results
Contact Me
AIM
• Kamisuke
E-mail
• Click Here
OtakuBoards
• Tristus
Website
• Click Here
Vitals
Birthday
• 1991-05-23
Gender
•
Male
Location
• Maryland
Member Since
• 2006-02-05
Occupation
• Artist/Musician/Ronin
Real Name
• Like I'm gonna tell you.
Personal
Achievements
• I've become one of the best artists in my high school. That and I'm a certified lunatic in Honors American Lit.
Anime Fan Since
• I read a version of Heidi in anime-style.
Favorite Anime
• No favorites. Currently keeping up with Code Geass
Goals
• Finish senior year
Hobbies
• Drawing, playing Piano, watching Bruce Lee movies, and playing fighting games.
Talents
• Piano, Drawing, and defeating my enemies...
|
|
|
Friday, July 28, 2006
In the meantime...
What is the "Ultimate Morality"? By what must acts be justified? Many people base their acts on religious texts, such as the Bible, the Qu'ran, or the Sutras of the Buddha. Others base their actions on the laws of the state or national government. Many actions are based on pure human instinct, driven by the will to survive, regardless of moral codes or religious responsibilities. Others just do something for no reason.
But as a society that [is meant to] promote the equality of human beings, as well as the need for self-preservation, what should we establish our deeeds on?
I believe that the human will is driven by two [possible] causes: Natural instinct, which is a human's reaction to events regardless of any social conditioning, and social restraint, which includes Religious and Government Laws. It is a combination of these two sources that create the natural morality that makes humankind, well, human.
One should act accordingly in order to preserve him/herself, as is the case of natural instinct, but one should also follow his/her duty (if any) to follow the laws of the state, if they are in agreement with one's religious responsibilities; Even then, one must follow the obligations of social restraint only if they are in agreement with the natural morality, which has been gained over the millenia by humans, as well as proto-humans, as a means of both preserving oneself and preserving the community, for without the influence of the community, or the community itself, the lonesome human would surely die in the wild. And that is what we must follow as the "Ultimate Morality": A mix of instinct, social restraint, and natural morality.
Any thoughts on my discourse?
Comments
(1)
« Home |
|
