So, after some bits of discussion about the inadequacy of the term "wonder" in describing the phenomenon of the greek understanding of thaumazein as well as the possibility of latter in how we could discern the essence of the human being, it leaves me with more questions as usual. Which is a good thing. Must a natural law of ethics necessarily require a divine source to serve as its ultimate "reason"? Or perhaps we could work within a notion of practical sufficiency that permits a reasonable "ignorance" or assumption that such a source as the ultimate "reason" is not required in discussing and determining ethics?
