Moral Progress or Corruption

[Tecumsehsbones]

It's Tytler, T-Bones.

Yes it is. Good catch. Doesn't change the fact that he was a Scottish monarchist.

 

[Zipperfish]

You need to read more Tyler. If you read a bit more than a cut-and-paste snippet, you'd know that he wasn't American at all: he was Scottish. You'd also know that he was cynical and dismissive of democracy.


The U.S. still exists. How's the KGB doing? Or the USSR, for that matter?

Interesting that you rely on quotes from people who have been proven wrong.

Sorry about the Tytler thing--I just saw the quote and thought it encapsulated my viewpoint well. I probably would have used a more natural anaology myself, given my background, maybe something like "The bloom smells sweetest before it starts to rot." Anyways, I certainly don't think Tyler has been "proven wrong." I think the link from opulence to decay has been made by many others, and there are plenty of historical examples.

It wasn't meant as a slight to the US. Indeed, the US is the most moral of all western nations. Britain seems more demoralized these days.

As for Bezmenov's quotes, I came across them a couple of years ago. I was thinking of the global warming debate, and how it just wasn't getting anywhere. All this vaunted intellect of humanity, and yet it's essentially a zero sum game. As Bezmenov notes, even when given authentic information, a demoralized person, or nation, will not know what to do.

A moral nation knows one truth; a demoralized one argues many.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

A moral nation knows one truth; a demoralized one argues many.

Are you conflating morality and morale? I would suggest that a great deal of immorality indeed has been sparked by "knowing one truth."

 

[cj44]

Well-spoken, cj.

The following is a worthy exposition of "form of godliness" by Spurgeon:

http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols34-36/chs2088.pdf



It's Tytler, T-Bones.

Motar: Thank you for the outstanding Spurgeon sermon. It was excellent admonishment for my spirit.

 

[Zipperfish]

Are you conflating morality and morale? I would suggest that a great deal of immorality indeed has been sparked by "knowing one truth."

A great deal of death and destruction has been sparked by knowing "one truth." Indeed, this is sometimes (rather naively, in my opinion) the reason that religion is blamed for so much mayhem. Religious folks quickly point out that Hitler, Mao, and Stalin were not driven by religious zeal. They were not religious but knew "one truth." I wouldn't call that immoral though, if it is the accepted morality of that time and place.

Of course, I predominately ascribe to the Nietzschean definition of morality, which isn't commonly shared. From the wiki:

Master–slave morality is a central theme
of Friedrich Nietzsche's works, in particular the first essay of On the
Genealogy of Morality. Nietzsche argued that there were two fundamental
types of morality: 'Master morality' and 'slave morality'. Slave morality values
things like kindness, humility and sympathy, while master morality values pride,
strength, and nobility. Master morality weighs actions on a scale of good or bad
consequences unlike slave morality which weighs actions on a scale of
good or evil intentions. What he meant by 'morality' deviates from common
understanding of this term. For Nietzsche, a particular morality is inseparable
from the formation of a particular culture. This means that its language, codes
and practices, narratives, and institutions are informed by the struggle between
these two types of moral valuation. Master–slave morality provides the basis of
all exegesis of Western thought.

Master–slave morality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Motar]

A great deal of death and destruction has been sparked by knowing "one truth." Indeed, this is sometimes (rather naively, in my opinion) the reason that religion is blamed for so much mayhem. Religious folks quickly point out that Hitler, Mao, and Stalin were not driven by religious zeal. They were not religious but knew "one truth." I wouldn't call that immoral though, if it is the accepted morality of that time and place.

Of course, I predominately ascribe to the Nietzschean definition of morality, which isn't commonly shared. From the wiki:
Master–slave morality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."
Benjamin Franklin, Continental Congress, 1778