| Victorlink87 said: This is interesting. I would argue that its tough to label any other species outside of other apes or octopi as having morals simply because we seem to operate at a much higher level of sentience. Be that due to brain, soul, spirit etc I am not here to discuss.
Either way, it would be tough to argue that we aren't broken by saying we are less broken than X species.
That's why I say as a species. Not all people are equal in their brokeness or morality. However, even those that strive to be great have moral failures of some kind.
In regards to the environment I would argue both. Its due to us being more capable, but also lacking morality. Due to our higher level of operation we have a prerogative to protect and nourish our planet and yet we haven't. Why? Fear, anger, and greed come to mind first. All of which, except fear, demonstrate a lack of morality. A perfectly moral mankind would still negatively impact the planet as we will need to use it to survive, but we wouldn't hunt to extinction, we would clean up after ourselves and we wouldn't be so divided over protecting our planet.
This of course is effected by whether or not you view morality (generally) as subjective or objective. |
I can see your stance, but I believe morality is relative and subjective. In our history, morality has changed over generations. There are some tenets we've stuck to, but a whole bunch of things we see as right or wrong, ethical or corrupt, are completely different in just a span of a hundred years.
And if we don't gauge morality by relativity, than that means all species "suck" as the post title states. We're the apex of morality and yet we are considered morally broken, so what does that mean for other species? If we're morally broken, then other species are more morally bankrupt (either barely having a sense of morality or lacking that sense altogether). I see that as a bleak view of all animals, and us as a species in particular.
