“The Tao, which others may call Natural Law or Traditional Morality or the First Principles of Practical Reason or the First Platitudes, is not one among a series of possible systems of value. It is the sole source of all value judgments. If it is rejected, all value is rejected. If any value is retained, it is retained. The effort to refute it and raise a new system of value in its place is self-contradictory. There has never been, and never will be, a radically new judgment of value in the history of the world. What purport to be new systems or…ideologies…all consist of fragments from the Tao itself, arbitrarily wrenched from their context in the whole and then swollen to madness in their isolation, yet still owing to the Tao and to it alone such validity as they posses.”
Men without Chests
...“The Tao, which others may call Natural Law or Traditional Morality or the First Principles of Practical Reason or the First Platitudes,...
___________________________________________________________________________
Thanks grey_whiskers, I wasn’t going to just spout out something about the TAO and get it all messed up. I didn’t have the time to look it up yet. Now I don’t have to because you have conveniently helped me out.
Man cannot determine right from wrong on his own. Man can’t transcend his material, limited scope of existence to make such determinations. We need someone to give them to us.
Thanks be to God we aren’t left to our own devices - dog eat dog - survival of the fittest - might makes right. Survival would be questionable at best.