quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

"Why dont you point out the great number of barbaric societies that have thrived"

I can think of one - ours.

T

quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct

"Nothing in my arguments employs any logical fallacies. "

Then I suggest you reread your post 207.  On one hand you argue that a society can be suboptimal based on limited information, and then you argue that survival is the only metric. Yes...show me a logical fallacy or inconsistency between those two.

Yet barbaric societies thrive on limited information- otherwise they become civilized. an unsupported and imo preposterous suppositions.

Furthermore- again- if your criterion for success of a society is survival- how do you reconcile these two points of view- i.e. that one society is better than another?  Again there is no inconsistency. As an aside, you conflate a code of ethics being optimal with the society being "better", the latter is subjective, the former ultimately measurable.
 
More importantly  "Better" also implies that the fitness of different codes of ethics can be measured on the same criteria and one identified as superior, which I never said, and I disagree with. Different circumstances make a given code of ethics optimal for one society when it may be anathema to another, and more than one can survive. The analogies to biology/evolution may clarify what I am saying.
 
 Again, Society A will deem its code of ethics "morally superior" to Society B's or it will change (ie that code of ethics will not survive). 

Sam

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

It would depend upon the definition one is using for barbarism. Very subjective criteria from how I have seen the word being used lately.

quote:

ORIGINAL: darklight17

Let's not watch this get ugly.

With that said, it would be absurd to compare the definition of barbaric 2000 years ago with what is considered to be barbaric today. Civilization has evolved, and in some eyes, lesser things are barbaric today.

quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct

"With that said, it would be absurd to compare the definition of barbaric 2000 years ago with what is considered to be barbaric today. Civilization has evolved, and in some eyes, lesser things are barbaric today. "

Or greater things are barbaric today.  Consider the genocides of a Stalin, an Adolf Hitler, or a Pol Pot.   These genocides would make some medieval warlords salivate- the ability to murder vast numbers of your enemies.  Of course, we developed the technology to do so- and used it.

Or consider the possible effects of climate change on sea levels- the US may go down as the biggest mass murderers in history if things begin to tip quickly.   Our consumption of fossil fuels will probably have the most impact on the developing world- far from our homes which can be built in other locations relatively easily. Or how about the US nuclear arsenal?  We really need all those weapons to feel safe, don't we? 

In an earlier time- there was a certain glory and honor in combat with an opponent who was effectively your equal.  Nowadays we have push button warfare- we can wipe out a dozen soldiers or more on the battlefield from the comfort of a swivel chair thousands of miles away- and with as little remorse as swatting a fly.

I'm sorry, but there is a world of difference between technologically evolved and morally evolved.  If we're still executing people, torturing them, and denying food, shelter and education to those who had the misfortune of being born poor, then I'm not sure why we should be congratulating ourselves.  All cultures consider themselves superior to what's come before them, even if barbarism replaces civilization as in the fall of Greece, Rome, Babylon etc.  We're technologically superior to what's come before us- but I doubt we've really advanced morally at all.

Sam

quote:

The DC sniper was executed tonight at 9:11 Eastern time. Why anyone would not want this scum executed is beyond me. I am glad the Feds still have common sense.
ORIGINAL: servantforuse

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales

quote:

The DC sniper was executed tonight at 9:11 Eastern time. Why anyone would not want this scum executed is beyond me. I am glad the Feds still have common sense.
ORIGINAL: servantforuse

While I still wrestle with the concept of the death penalty, it amazes me that the proponents of it miss the core concept of those against it. Those against the death penalty are not in favor of people who kill people. They are against the idea of being part, as a society, of killing people. It all depends who you want to be and what you want your society to be.

Tonight, a man who deserved to die was put to death. What bothers me is not what happened to him because of it, but what happens to us because of it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

The fact is the death penalty does not deter crime, is applied in a bigoted fashion and is applied to innocent people. Those are all convincing arguments why I don't support the state killing in my name.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales

quote:

The DC sniper was executed tonight at 9:11 Eastern time. Why anyone would not want this scum executed is beyond me. I am glad the Feds still have common sense.
ORIGINAL: servantforuse

While I still wrestle with the concept of the death penalty, it amazes me that the proponents of it miss the core concept of those against it. Those against the death penalty are not in favor of people who kill people. They are against the idea of being part, as a society, of killing people. It all depends who you want to be and what you want your society to be.

Tonight, a man who deserved to die was put to death. What bothers me is not what happened to him because of it, but what happens to us because of it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

The DC sniper was executed tonight at 9:11 Eastern time. Why anyone would not want this scum executed is beyond me. I am glad the Feds still have common sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Irishknight


Spinner, while I fully understand your point of view, I look at it differently. I am reassured that a rabid animal will harm no more human beings. Does it mean an end to all crime? No. It just ends the danger that HE will escape to do it again.
To me it is the same as putting down an animal that has become dangerous or sick. I cried the last two times I had to do it but I still did it. Once was for the good of those around the animal and once was for the animal.