"You say that my moral code is a code that puts faith only in myself . That is not true . I very openly acknowledge that if I never had input from the outside - moral codes which were presented to me with the reasons behind them - then my moral code as determined solely by myself would have been meager indeed . I have had a wide range of influences which have helped determined my moral code :"
"You gave a list here . What is your reasoning for believing they are true ? Because it makes sense to you ? Well mine makes sense to me . Why is it that when I state mine comes from an outside source it is unreasoned but when yours is somewhat developed from outside sources it is not ? In the end , you have a moral code developed by you whether influenced by the outside or not . It therefore puts faith in yourself and lends itself to be compromised . I can even relate this to the accounting world We have something called segregation of duties . It basically is used so you have more accountability . In my case , I have a moral code outside of my control . I have to be accountable to that . In your case you are only accountable to yourself and thus it is fairly easy to change the moral code to suit some self desires . This is a bit of a tangent so lets move on The main point is , your code still works on some level of blind faith as you claim mine does . I freely admit mine is blind faith and I only wish others would admit to theirs as well . Just think of it as you ca n't prove anything you can only assume certain things and make calls based upon those very basic assumptions ."
"I have had a wide range of influences which have helped determined my moral code :"
"Just think of it as you ca n't prove anything you can only assume certain things and make calls based upon those very basic assumptions ."