Talk:Morality: Difference between revisions
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
Why is this article marked as having a NPOV dispute? - [[User:Bernardwoodpecker|Bernardwoodpecker]] ([[User talk:Bernardwoodpecker|talk]]) 14:39, 14 December 2013 (UTC) |
Why is this article marked as having a NPOV dispute? - [[User:Bernardwoodpecker|Bernardwoodpecker]] ([[User talk:Bernardwoodpecker|talk]]) 14:39, 14 December 2013 (UTC) |
||
:{{ping|Bernardwoodpecker}} An editor [[Talk:Morality/Archive_1#Very_serious_NPOV_issues_here.|discussed the issue here]]. |
:{{ping|Bernardwoodpecker}} An editor [[Talk:Morality/Archive_1#Very_serious_NPOV_issues_here.|discussed the issue here]]. |
||
The section on Evolution seems to imply that natural selection favors a single kind of morality. Perhaps it would help to cite current scholarship indicating that it actually produced [[moral diversity]] (as it produced diversity of blood-type and sex). Such citations can be found in that article.[[Special:Contributions/165.189.37.11|165.189.37.11]] ([[User talk:165.189.37.11|talk]]) 18:57, 3 February 2014 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 18:57, 3 February 2014
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Morality article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 100 days  |
 | Philosophy: Ethics C‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Psychology C‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Morality article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 100 days |
Small deletion
Paragraph "In any society, actual behavior patterns diverge.." deleted as not relevant to morals as construct/in definition. Whilst I like the first sentence I couldn't leave it standalone. The remainder, in my opinion, is of the class "this [subjectively classed] group of people (pundits) definitely do [semi-subjectively classed] action (pose politically)", which strikes me as unnecessary/POV. mr happyhour 18:10 04 AUG 06
Too many templates
Har har at the recent addition of a {{too many templates}} template here (though that, strangely enough, seems to print a message that there are not yet enough templates), but I agree with the sentiment. The number of "such-and-such redirects here" hatnotes on this article is getting Too Damn High. Is there some way of condensing this down to something more reasonable? --Pfhorrest (talk) 04:24, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
- I agree, and a lot of that stuff shouldn't redirect here - they're dictionary type words that are ambiguous and don't necessarily mean morality. They either shouldn't be anything, or should be a disambiguation page. Richard001 (talk) 23:45, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
NPOV
Why is this article marked as having a NPOV dispute? - Bernardwoodpecker (talk) 14:39, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
- @Bernardwoodpecker: An editor discussed the issue here.
The section on Evolution seems to imply that natural selection favors a single kind of morality. Perhaps it would help to cite current scholarship indicating that it actually produced moral diversity (as it produced diversity of blood-type and sex). Such citations can be found in that article.165.189.37.11 (talk) 18:57, 3 February 2014 (UTC)