contractualist OP t1_iuk6hqe wrote on October 31, 2022 at 11:15 PM

Reply to comment by InspectorG-007 in Freedom vs. Utility (the modern Euthyphro dilemma) by contractualist

This appears to be more of a descriptive view, whereas I'm focusing on the normative.

If its just about DNA, you can justify a patriarchal military state that can produce more citizens and conquer more territory. It may be effective at its goal, but its not moral. Morality, meanwhile, would be based on the principles free people would agree to in a social contract.

InspectorG-007 t1_iuk7rqi wrote on October 31, 2022 at 11:25 PM

A Patriarchy military State in modern day would run into the problem of blowing up the very resources it's fighting for.

What is Morality other than a survival mechanism?

Social Contract works great, but unforseen(or ignored) consequences eventually force us to slide down Maslow's Pyramid and resort to force.

Plus, I would argue, that due to humans being Pack Mammals, most will naturally leave the decision making(essentially participation) to delegation during times of plenty, only to be left with poor planning and grift when times change to bad.

contractualist OP t1_iuk9cvr wrote on October 31, 2022 at 11:38 PM

>A Patriarchy military State in modern day would run into the problem of blowing up the very resources it's fighting for.

So if we had enough resources, it would become moral?

Because morality is grounded on freedom, it would be what free people would reasonably agree to. A survival mechanism is amoral; any actions can be justified to survive.

The only way we can judge what is called "sliding down" is by having a certain standard to fall from. The standard is the social contract, its the moral law whether or not its obeyed.

I agree that the social contract will be delegated and I will discuss this more on my substack (I talk about it a bit here)