Socratic Dialogue
Socratic Dialogue
Socates: Time, contemplating the assumed meaning of a question or word, is better than ignorance; in an endeavour to further understand its implication. An ignorant life is filled with emptiness, what remains of complex cerebral intellect, if you fail to question. Would you disagree?
Interlocutor: State the nature of questioning, does then the purpose of enquiring imply that an answer is unbeknownst to the inquirer.
Socrates: How can society comprehend, if we don't query all? Interlocutor: Then the implication that the defined is consistently incorrect, is assumed. The original meaning of a word, was derived from an origin.
Socrates: The explanation is always subjective…
Interlocutor: interruption - Is the accuracy …show more content…
The paramedic arrived at the scene prior to any other emergency services, only to discover that the accident occurred between two, individuals of different colour. This racist paramedic was nurtured in an environment where his immediate family and dominant figures were racially prejudiced. The coloured person sustained major wounds with a severe cerebral injury, while the other individual received minor injuries but was obviously under the influence of strong narcotics. The paramedic elected to assist the non-coloured individual, as he considered it the ethical decision. Therefore, the paramedic’s morality was subjective, as influenced by culture, society and learned …show more content…
This is why morality is relative.
Do people adjust their morals, or are they singular to certain situations?
These questions relate to every action; particular actions and circumstances cannot be categorized as immoral or moral.
Theoretically, what if a person who was observed to exhibit “good morals”, decided to torture, rape and murder everybody they encountered. If they demonstrated the same innate morals that I theoretically possess, why don't I torture, rape and murder random citizens.
Is it probable that this person innately considers that murder is immoral, but upbringing, education and experience incapacitates this psychological capacity? Or do people retain no innate morals, and therefore experiences and societal definitions are the bases of their morality?
Interlocutor: From where does innate morality originate? If it exists from evolution, why have homo-sapiens not developed other innate knowledge, which is essential to survival, but is not inherent?
Therefore, some moral decisions cannot be made objectively, as morality is not a methodical process.
Socrates: To verify the ability to discern an objective morality, a confirmation that all actions can be measured objectively must be
Socates: Time, contemplating the assumed meaning of a question or word, is better than ignorance; in an endeavour to further understand its implication. An ignorant life is filled with emptiness, what remains of complex cerebral intellect, if you fail to question. Would you disagree?
Interlocutor: State the nature of questioning, does then the purpose of enquiring imply that an answer is unbeknownst to the inquirer.
Socrates: How can society comprehend, if we don't query all? Interlocutor: Then the implication that the defined is consistently incorrect, is assumed. The original meaning of a word, was derived from an origin.
Socrates: The explanation is always subjective…
Interlocutor: interruption - Is the accuracy …show more content…
The paramedic arrived at the scene prior to any other emergency services, only to discover that the accident occurred between two, individuals of different colour. This racist paramedic was nurtured in an environment where his immediate family and dominant figures were racially prejudiced. The coloured person sustained major wounds with a severe cerebral injury, while the other individual received minor injuries but was obviously under the influence of strong narcotics. The paramedic elected to assist the non-coloured individual, as he considered it the ethical decision. Therefore, the paramedic’s morality was subjective, as influenced by culture, society and learned …show more content…
This is why morality is relative.
Do people adjust their morals, or are they singular to certain situations?
These questions relate to every action; particular actions and circumstances cannot be categorized as immoral or moral.
Theoretically, what if a person who was observed to exhibit “good morals”, decided to torture, rape and murder everybody they encountered. If they demonstrated the same innate morals that I theoretically possess, why don't I torture, rape and murder random citizens.
Is it probable that this person innately considers that murder is immoral, but upbringing, education and experience incapacitates this psychological capacity? Or do people retain no innate morals, and therefore experiences and societal definitions are the bases of their morality?
Interlocutor: From where does innate morality originate? If it exists from evolution, why have homo-sapiens not developed other innate knowledge, which is essential to survival, but is not inherent?
Therefore, some moral decisions cannot be made objectively, as morality is not a methodical process.
Socrates: To verify the ability to discern an objective morality, a confirmation that all actions can be measured objectively must be