You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Moral Truth is the Foundation and Measure of True Unity
Theft isn't legislated, and the law recognizes the difference between necessity and theft, as do animals.
You're threading a flimsy line of thought: do the means justify the ends. They don't. It's objective, what is necessary and what isn't, equally what Theft, Murder, Rape is, is never for interpretation. Whether it is good or bad or whether justified or not peope will recognize readily.
Sorry, I can't agree with you at all. The theft can't be objective because even ownership isn't objective. You'd first need to have the ownership recognized objectively to even consider a theft (taking the ownership away without permission). Are you sure the house you paid for belong to yourself, or maybe it belong to the worms who occupy the land it's built on for generations? Anyway, I'm done here. Thanks for the discussion. It's always good to share different points of view. BTW, there would be no discussions needed or even existing if the 'morality' would be objective, there would be nothing to discuss, ever.
You're dissecting it into individual abstractions when it requires simple discernment of "Necessary vs Unnecessary" and arguing that because it doesn't resemble that it's not something that is evident in nature readily, trying to reason away, without much reasoning, how everything Recognizes the same things, whether something is Necessary and whether something is Unnecessary.
Because there's a universal recognition of things, albeit not sufficiently explicit for your tastes, there is no discussion since everyone is in agreement about what dirt, air and water are, or what is good and what is bad, what is necessary and what is needless.
I find it odd that abstractions are needed as to who the Sovereign of this planet are, worms built the Giza Water Pump.
http://sentinelkennels.com/Research_Article_V41.html