(Attempted) Philosophical Ramblings...

So I'm waiting for algebra to begin, but I'd thought I'd start a little philosophical homework early...

If god does not exist, to whom do we have a higher moral imperative to?

In the reading I still need to do for class, Kierkegaard says that we have a higher moral imperative to god above the universal (the morals/ethics of society). We could thus do things that our society would tell us is wrong or bad, but to god would be right. I suppose you could equate that to the people who bomb abortion clinics (which is a scary thought now that Button is volunteering at one now). According to us, and according to our laws, what Eric Rudolph did was wrong. But since he felt he was working for his higher power, i.e. god, he felt that his actions were right and justified.

I suppose this thinking could make the killing of the innocents in the bible and the smoting of Soddom and Ghmorra as cool as well. As long as your god tells you that you should do something, and he is your higher authority, where your higher moral imperative is, then you are not only correct but almost required to do the action you have been called to do.

So the question I pose is this: if there is no god, to whom do we owe a higher moral imperative to?

Obviously, the first answer is to yourself. But this seems to be a false answer, since we cannot be our own higher moral authority, because that would create a paradox where we would be both the lower and higher authority, both answerable to the other. So we cannot be our own higher moral authority.

We could query society for a higher moral authority, but society is already a moral authority, and it cannot be the higher authority and the universal authority. There has to be the dichotomy, just as we ourselves cannot be the HMA.

(to be continued...)