Fair point, and it's something I stumbled over a bit in my original post. I should have used a more objective definition of "rationality" — something that is independent of anyone's particular philosophy on morality. I believe if you Google "collective rationality", this has already been somewhat formalized, but I don't know too much about the theory other than the general idea behind it.
Re:Forgiveness in a vengeful age
by humanrebar on Wednesday November 25, 2015 @03:33AM
(#10626099)
Most concepts of modern rationality --at least the kind you're talking about-- presume some form of materialism, which is a giant jump to conclusions in a discussion about morality. This is especially interesting if we want to talk about objective concepts and measurements.
Who decides what's objective? Do we decide that collectively? Are we collectively rational enough to figure out if we're collectively rational enough to decide?
I think you're bordering on the tautological there. To say society's morals have improved demands an eternal natural law to evaluate it against. As society's view of what is the natural law changes, it's difficult to say whether we've improved rather than simply changed.