[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I (and I assume the same for most other people) have moral feelings that change with my understanding of the situation.

Suppose there is an absolute morality. How could I do better than follow the guide of my moral feelings?

If god then, as I've already wittered on about at length, my moral feelings are the best possible guide to absolute right/wrong.

If no god, then either I have no understanding of this moral absoluteness in which case my feelings are as good a guide as any or I understand this moral absoluteness.

If I understand this non-god moral absoluteness then is it possible that my feelings wouldn't mirror it? It seems nonsense to say I understand that something is wrong but I feel it is right.

Conclusion. If there is an absolute morality I can do no better than follow the guide of my moral feelings.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]Could you run this by me again without god?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll have a go.

Suppose there is an absolute right/wrong i.e. in any specific situation there is a correct moral action.

Suppose also that I have moral feelings that are informed by my understanding of the world. (I take this to be true - it seems to be how it works)

If I want to be moral then can I do better than follow my moral feelings?

I'm not sure the answer is no but I think it may be. What do you think?

chez

[/ QUOTE ]Is it possible to cut out your moral feelings in the conclusion.

Suppose there is an absolute right/wrong i.e. in any specific situation there is a correct moral action.

Suppose also that I have moral feelings that are informed by my understanding of the world. (I take this to be true - it seems to be how it works)

If I want to be moral then can I do better than follow my understanding of the world, or gain more understanding of the world?

A limitation of these thoughts is that my moral correctness can only be as good as my understanding of the world.