Theos-Talk Archives (January 1997 Message tl00222)

On Wed, 8 Jan 97, Bart Lidofsky <bartl@sprynet.com> wrote:

>	Essentially, everybody has a set of moral axioms. Some are pretty >much universal (such as "it is wrong to kill human beings"). However, in >most situations, there are several moral axioms that come into play, and
>there is almost always some conflict. 

Perception of morality would be meaningless if there was no objectively
existing morality to perceive.  There is a standard by which to measure
human perception of morality.


>	The Mahatmas, in my opinion, pointed their fingers in the right
>direction, when they expressed the importance of intent. If one's
>actions are well-thought out and intended to make the world a better
>place in which to live, then they can be said to be moral.

Intent guarantees results which conform to them eventually, but intent
cannot be separated from results.  Anyone who says that intent is all that
matters, and that results do not matter, does not have genuine intent.