27-03-2005 01:29									#181
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I also do think that it is very reasonable to say that relativism moves one towards amorality. I mean if "wrong" is just a conciet, than what's the big deal with murder?

	27-03-2005 01:36									#182
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: I also do think that it is very reasonable to say that relativism moves one towards amorality. I mean if "wrong" is just a conciet, than what's the big deal with murder?

However morality is just emotions. Ethics and reason are superior, for this reason.

	27-03-2005 01:45									#183
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Azazel quote: I also do think that it is very reasonable to say that relativism moves one towards amorality. I mean if "wrong" is just a conciet, than what's the big deal with murder? However morality is just emotions. Ethics and reason are superior, for this reason.

Could you elaborate? I'm not really trained here. How do you differentiate the terms. And do you think murder is wrong (intrinsically)?

	27-03-2005 02:01									#184
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Emotivism, Kantianism and relativism all suck.

Aristotle all the way babies!!!

	27-03-2005 02:04									#185
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

neitsche?

	27-03-2005 02:05									#186
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

BTW, would you agree that a man learns to be brave by imitation and practice?

	27-03-2005 02:07									#187
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: BTW, would you agree that a man learns to be brave by imitation and practice?

Sure... for most brave people.. but some people are born brave.

I have weird views on ethical theory. I think that most modern theories are based on logical distinctions that hold no water (conceptual empirical).

That's stopped us from pointing out the obviously true things about morality in the same way one would uncontroversially point out that trees exist.

The religious sex-haters have had their oar in as well.

	27-03-2005 02:12									#188
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Could you elaborate? I'm not really trained here. How do you differentiate the terms. And do you think murder is wrong (intrinsically)?

dictionary:

Morality - A system of ideas of right and wrong conduct

ethics, in philosophy, the study and evaluation of human conduct in the light of moral principles.

The difference is of course the organized approach, the reasoning in the establishment of the principles, and the lack of self contradictory statements.

I would say that morality is the feelings of right and wrong a person has, while ethics are a logical construct of right and wrong.

About murder, or to put it more generally, the act of taking a human life, is negative, if we look at it without any context. however, while analyzing the ethical value of this act we must always consider the context.

	27-03-2005 02:26									#189
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

So do you think murder is intrinsically wrong? Are you only interested in how people choose to organize their feelings (is this really psychology or sociology)? Or are you interested in what they should think is wrong or what is wrong?

	27-03-2005 02:27									#190
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Agathon quote: BTW, would you agree that a man learns to be brave by imitation and practice? Sure... for most brave people.. but some people are born brave. I have weird views on ethical theory. I think that most modern theories are based on logical distinctions that hold no water (conceptual empirical). That's stopped us from pointing out the obviously true things about morality in the same way one would uncontroversially point out that trees exist. The religious sex-haters have had their oar in as well.

Could you just boil down your thoughts and lay it on the line in 3 letter words?

	27-03-2005 02:36									#191
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

OK.

Mos tpe opl eth ink tha tmo ral ity has tod owi the mot ion sbe cau set hey hav bee nfo ole dby cra pph ilo sop hyt hat has mad eth emd oub tth eob vio usw ays wed eli ber ate mor all y.

	27-03-2005 02:38									#192
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Morality only has to do with emotion at its lowest level. What axioms you're willing to accept, in other words.

	27-03-2005 03:06									#193
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Referring to patriotism, TCO obviously thinks it's immoral to be unpatriotic. This comes maybe from his love for his country, but there's something else too it also. Ramo also loves his country but doesn't see the need to be patriotic or get upset when others aren't. That's becaused he has used reason to come to his own conclusions.

	27-03-2005 05:25									#194
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: I also do think that it is very reasonable to say that relativism moves one towards amorality. I mean if "wrong" is just a conciet, than what's the big deal with murder?

The basis for my morality is derived from my emotions, so isn't a purely intellectual conceit that can be dismissed at will (like, say, a mathematial axiom could be). I feel very strongly about the morality of killing. I also know that people can feel differently than myself about killing (say, some people believe that the state killing out of revenge can be moral), but that doesn't diminish my beliefs.

Why do you belive in an absolute morality?

	27-03-2005 08:01									#195
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Well if you don't, then rationally there is no problem with murder.

	27-03-2005 08:02									#196
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Agathon OK. Mos tpe opl eth ink tha tmo ral ity has tod owi the mot ion sbe cau set hey hav bee nfo ole dby cra pph ilo sop hyt hat has mad eth emd oub tth eob vio usw ays wed eli ber ate mor all y.

ok. translate it out of 3 letter words.

	27-03-2005 09:28									#197
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

"Most people think that morality has to do with emotions because they have been fooled by crap philosophy that has made them doubt the obvious ways we deliberate morally".

For example: if confronted with a brutal and senseless murder, many people believe that it is intelligible to ask the question "is this really wrong?". That in my view is like asking whether a leaf is "really green".

Morality is a practice with obvious rules that everyone knows and follows. Disputes only really arise in difficult cases and when people are trying to justify immoral behaviour.

People have also been affected by religion and relativism. Neither has anything to do with morality but tends to skew people's opinions a bit.

For example: many people have convinced themselves that a life of mindless promiscuity can be beneficial to you. Generally, most people who say this kind of crap either do it in an attempt to justify a particular act of wrongdoing or say it, but would never dream of doing it themselves because they know it is wrong.

One result of this is that moral arguments become unnecessarily tedious as people deny the obvious in order not to lose. As I said, it is rather like if someone constantly denied that a green object was in fact green or that the rules of chess weren't what they are. In 99% of cases they are lying.

Fortunately, people tend to do the right thing more often than they think it.

Our core basic understanding of morality (what we actually do) is mostly Aristotelian, although with more emphasis on sympathy and compassion than he had. However, most people's explicit understanding of morality (what the say) is closer to Mill.

	27-03-2005 09:34									#198
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I am not a Nihilist, other than that, I don't know what the hell I am. prehaps some type of Humanist, maybe...

	27-03-2005 09:38									#199
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: I am not a Nihilist, other than that, I don't know what the hell I am. prehaps some type of Humanist, maybe...

People say they are nihilists, but if they really were they'd immediately kill themselves.

	27-03-2005 09:41									#200
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Agathon quote: I am not a Nihilist, other than that, I don't know what the hell I am. prehaps some type of Humanist, maybe... People say they are nihilists, but if they really were they'd immediately kill themselves.

	27-03-2005 09:43									#201
	Suffering from ads?

It proves my essential point. People say and believe all sorts of garbage about morality, but they all believe much the same thing when it comes to actually doing stuff.

	27-03-2005 10:07									#202
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I took a SelectSmart poll and got this:

#1 Kant
#2 Nietzsche
#3 Hume
#4 Aristotle
#5 Sextus Empiricus
#6 Protagoras
#7 Plato
#8 Aquinas
#9 Augustine

	27-03-2005 21:17									#203
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ramo quote: I also do think that it is very reasonable to say that relativism moves one towards amorality. I mean if "wrong" is just a conciet, than what's the big deal with murder? The basis for my morality is derived from my emotions, so isn't a purely intellectual conceit that can be dismissed at will (like, say, a mathematial axiom could be). I feel very strongly about the morality of killing. I also know that people can feel differently than myself about killing (say, some people believe that the state killing out of revenge can be moral), but that doesn't diminish my beliefs. Why do you belive in an absolute morality?

You're accounting for differences in moral beliefs with differences in people's feelings. I remember you once saying that you prefer to use reason to determine right from wrong to using your feelings. If everyone used reason to compensate for their feelings wouldn't they all come to the same conclusions.

	28-03-2005 12:03									#204
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I don't think I've said that, Kid. I may have said that I use reason to distill a coherent basis for my morality, from my emotions.

quote: Well if you don't, then rationally there is no problem with murder.

Yes, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with murder. For there is no intrinsic definition for which social interactions are "wrong." Can you tell me where this definition comes from, and what it is?

quote: For example: if confronted with a brutal and senseless murder, many people believe that it is intelligible to ask the question "is this really wrong?". That in my view is like asking whether a leaf is "really green". [...] One result of this is that moral arguments become unnecessarily tedious as people deny the obvious in order not to lose. As I said, it is rather like if someone constantly denied that a green object was in fact green or that the rules of chess weren't what they are. In 99% of cases they are lying.

I strongly feel that the death penalty is extremely immoral; some conservatives feel that it is perfectly moral. Who's the liar?

	28-03-2005 18:53									#205
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Ramo I don't think I've said that, Kid. I may have said that I use reason to distill a coherent basis for my morality, from my emotions.

Why is it moral to punish children? We get a negative feeling from it, but we consider it moral because we've used reason to determine that it's the best thing to do. Sometimes we're wrong and we punish too hard or too little, but there is an absolute correct amount to punish the child, although people will disagree about the amount of punishment to be given. The absolute right amount of punishment is the amount that will help the child the most.

	28-03-2005 19:32									#206
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Yes, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with murder. For there is no intrinsic definition for which social interactions are "wrong." Can you tell me where this definition comes from, and what it is?

Did you not read what I said? Claiming that it is a matter of definition is already to make the mistake I was railing against.

	28-03-2005 22:08									#207
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

1. That was responding to GP.
2. Proof by bald assertion may pass muster in "philosophy" but not with me. You haven't justified it.
3. We tend to share similar emotions wrt some basic social interactions, but we also tend to place different levels of value on such interactions. That's why we have political parties instead of precisely the same ideology. And then there are sociopaths.

quote: Why is it moral to punish children? We get a negative feeling from it, but we consider it moral because we've used reason to determine that it's the best thing to do. Sometimes we're wrong and we punish too hard or too little, but there is an absolute correct amount to punish the child, although people will disagree about the amount of punishment to be given. The absolute right amount of punishment is the amount that will help the child the most.

As I said, we use reason to distill a logically coherent basis for your morality from your emotions, to help resolve conflicting emotions.

We certainly don't use pure reason wrt punishing our kids. Since we don't even have a rational basis on which to say that helping our kids is even moral. Our moralities are based on an emotional foundation.

	28-03-2005 22:21									#208
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Ramo quote: Why is it moral to punish children? We get a negative feeling from it, but we consider it moral because we've used reason to determine that it's the best thing to do. Sometimes we're wrong and we punish too hard or too little, but there is an absolute correct amount to punish the child, although people will disagree about the amount of punishment to be given. The absolute right amount of punishment is the amount that will help the child the most. As I said, we use reason to distill a logically coherent basis for your morality from your emotions, to help resolve conflicting emotions. We certainly don't use pure reason wrt punishing our kids. Since we don't even have a rational basis on which to say that helping our kids is even moral. Our moralities are based on an emotional foundation.

I'm not talking about the basis of morality. I'm talking about the conclusions we reach. We don't reach different conclusions because we have different levels of feelings about social interactions. We reach different conclusions because we either use reason properly, improperly, or not at all.

Those of us who use reason properly don't trust our feelings completely. We only have some control over our feelings and they often decieve us. We shouldn't come to conclusions over motality just because it is based on our feelings.

	30-03-2005 10:50									#209
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: 2. Proof by bald assertion may pass muster in "philosophy" but not with me. You haven't justified it.

What if it is incapable of justification? (Particularly conceptual justification) What more can you do to show that something is green to someone else other than point at it? That is ultimately what morality is like.

As I said before, people's behaviour betrays their Aristotelianism, whatever they might say. That's not a conceptual proof, but that is all you can really expect.

You're asking for a sort of proof that doesn't really exist and isn't applicable to morality. Perhaps you should think about whether your question makes sense before you ask it.