DeepspaceDigital

DeepspaceDigital t1_it2lbvx wrote

Reply to comment by ValyrianJedi in Philip Kitcher argues that morality is a social technology designed to solve problems emerging from the fragility of human altruism. Morality can be evaluated objectively, but without assuming moral truths. The view makes sense against a Darwinian view of life, but it is not social Darwinism. by Ma3Ke4Li3

Living in a way that is anywhere near to that of slaves is a state of poverty. From clothes to cutlery to tools or drugs there were plenty of things to have in the 19th century. In the South with no one to buy the stuff, there was no need for people there to make or sell the stuff either. That is a big part of why that region was a lot poorer than the North.

1

DeepspaceDigital t1_isw20y9 wrote

Reply to comment by ValyrianJedi in Philip Kitcher argues that morality is a social technology designed to solve problems emerging from the fragility of human altruism. Morality can be evaluated objectively, but without assuming moral truths. The view makes sense against a Darwinian view of life, but it is not social Darwinism. by Ma3Ke4Li3

Free labor’s cost is massive. Without a paid workforce you have very few consumers for your economy to serve so almost everyone stays poor along with slaves.

1

DeepspaceDigital t1_iskwxbu wrote

Reply to Philip Kitcher argues that morality is a social technology designed to solve problems emerging from the fragility of human altruism. Morality can be evaluated objectively, but without assuming moral truths. The view makes sense against a Darwinian view of life, but it is not social Darwinism. by Ma3Ke4Li3

If you cannot change anyone else's view of morality, why is yours important? We are all free to ponder the subject, but if morality is a million different things to a million different people, I can't see why it matters. Perhaps your view of morality really is superior. If that is the case how do you implement it? Does morality have a role to play in education?

4