Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Are we born….Good?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Are we born….Good? Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/18/2014 2:04:06 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Justice applied inequitably is hardly supportive of absolute morality.

The existence of moral standards that hold across time and place cannot be refuted simply by observing that they are too often disregarded. Not to put too fine a point on it, your argument itself depends on a moral absolute, namely, that justice must be applied equitably in all times and places or else it isn't justice.

K.




< Message edited by Kirata -- 2/18/2014 2:15:08 PM >

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/18/2014 2:57:40 PM   
Toysinbabeland


Posts: 1693
Joined: 3/4/2012
From: the other end of Cx's leash
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

It is a morally odious act in Western Civilization. In classical Greece male children were sodomized by the elite warrior class. In the land of the Aztec human sacrifices were made to gods. In 19th Century America African children were taken from their mothers and sold as slaves under the auspices of the Christian bible. Today in various American states people are executed despite the biblical prohibition against killing. So what appears to be an absolute prohibition is relative to time and place.

These types of arguments fail because they either ignore or are insensitive to how the victims might have felt about it.

K.




That.
wholeheartedly agreed, how could it be anything but that?

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/18/2014 5:41:00 PM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub
 I would say it makes no difference what he considered... his actions and deeds were judged by the majority of mankind to be immoral.

Butch


Doesn't it make a difference though?

That a large portion of a country can be convinced that they're doing good when the rest of us consider their actions to be super evil puts some real significant nails in the coffin of the idea that we're born "good".

(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/18/2014 7:17:52 PM   
evesgrden


Posts: 597
Joined: 6/9/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Toysinbabeland


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata



These types of arguments fail because they either ignore or are insensitive to how the victims might have felt about it.

K.

[/font][/size]


That.
wholeheartedly agreed, how could it be anything but that?




So if someone feels they have suffered too much from an act, that act is therefore immoral?


An abusive husband is heartbroken because his wife left him.


I don't think the "how they felt about it" is the basis for defining that which is immoral.


Suffering can certainly be a factor, but as soon as you have a variety of factors that have to be considered in determining whether an act is immoral or not, suddenly we're talking about context.

Tie someone up and torment them till they're begging you to stop and beyond.
With consent, you're doing it right. Without consent, meet Bubba your new roomie

Context.



_____________________________

What you permit, you promote.

(in reply to Toysinbabeland)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/18/2014 9:12:09 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: evesgrden
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

These types of arguments fail because they either ignore or are insensitive to how the victims might have felt about it.

So if someone feels they have suffered too much from an act, that act is therefore immoral?

An abusive husband is heartbroken because his wife left him....

Context.

Context indeed. Where is the context to which my comment was a response? Let me refresh you: Human sacrifice. Sodomizing children. Tearing children from their parents to sell them as slaves. Still want to go with the analogy of an abusive wife upsetting her husband by fleeing from him? I'll venture the hope that you'll consider that a rhetorical question.

The examples were proposed to show the nonexistence of moral absolutes in the world. But they only demonstrate the lack of any functioning moral absolutes in the victimizers, not the victims. Even the argument itself is based on those acts being absolute moral transgressions, because it would otherwise make no sense to cite them as examples.

K.

< Message edited by Kirata -- 2/18/2014 9:28:30 PM >

(in reply to evesgrden)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/19/2014 8:57:55 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Justice applied inequitably is hardly supportive of absolute morality.

The existence of moral standards that hold across time and place cannot be refuted simply by observing that they are too often disregarded. Not to put too fine a point on it, your argument itself depends on a moral absolute, namely, that justice must be applied equitably in all times and places or else it isn't justice.

K.




The exceptions are dramatic and cannot be so easily dismissed. Clearly, in the instances I cited systematized morality was dictated by the existing power structure and is therefore relative to that power structure. It is not simply a question of disregarding absolutes. My argument from equitable justice is not a moral absolute but a functional statement that shows moral absolutes are illusions promoted by power structure and elitism.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/19/2014 11:37:15 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

The examples were proposed to show the nonexistence of moral absolutes in the world. But they only demonstrate the lack of any functioning moral absolutes in the victimizers, not the victims. Even the argument itself is based on those acts being absolute moral transgressions, because it would otherwise make no sense to cite them as examples.

A silly circular argument. A moral absolute would require acknowledgement from all, especially the institutions of governance. For five thousand years slavery was morally acceptable in large populations in the world. That it is now disapproved by some speaks to the moral relativism even of owning the life and labor of another human being. Remnants of the old moral order persist even today in the caste systems of India and Latin America and the class systems of England and the United States.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/19/2014 1:40:54 PM   
evesgrden


Posts: 597
Joined: 6/9/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

A silly circular argument. A moral absolute would require acknowledgement from all, especially the institutions of governance. For five thousand years slavery was morally acceptable in large populations in the world. That it is now disapproved by some speaks to the moral relativism even of owning the life and labor of another human being. Remnants of the old moral order persist even today in the caste systems of India and Latin America and the class systems of England and the United States.


Indeed.


All good Jews and Christians who respect Moses and the 10 Commandments, might not be equally as familiar with Moses instructing that men women and children be killed, or that all be killed except the virgin girls, which the victors could take for themselves. There's no detail as to whether anal was ok or not, but we sure have murder, rape and kidnapping as part of God's plan.


"Numbers 31:7-18 NLT
But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle. "Why have you let all the women live?" he demanded. "These are the very ones who followed Balaam's advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the LORD at Mount Peor. They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD's people. Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves."





Now I happen to be an Atheist, and for me that's just wrong. But Moses didn't think so and according to lore he had a direct pipeline upstairs. On speed dial I guess.

Now what about extreme extortion? How far would someone go to save their child...


Sophie's Choice... and you can be sure the Nazis came up with stuff a whole lot worse than that.

It's not an easy question. How we decide what makes right vs what makes wrong no matter what has been debated for eons.

Any child can come up with a rule. Coming up with one that holds up under any and all imaginable circumstances is another thing altogether

So many arguments for and against. And there's the rub.




_____________________________

What you permit, you promote.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/19/2014 6:08:11 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: evesgrden
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

A moral absolute would require acknowledgement from all

Indeed.

What, precisely, is the invisible premise behind this extraordinary conclusion?

K.





< Message edited by Kirata -- 2/19/2014 6:22:02 PM >

(in reply to evesgrden)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/19/2014 9:06:32 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

your argument itself depends on a moral absolute, namely, that justice must be applied equitably...

My argument from equitable justice is not a moral absolute...

When, then, is it moral to apply justice inequitably?

K.


(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/20/2014 9:12:46 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: evesgrden
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

A moral absolute would require acknowledgement from all

Indeed.

What, precisely, is the invisible premise behind this extraordinary conclusion?

K.





Moral absolutism is an 'ought' or a 'should.' Without acceptance of the power structure to enforce it, the value is meaningless. My conclusion is not so 'extraordinary.' It should be pretty obvious to you. What human behavior is intrinsically good or bad outside of the context of time, place, or culture? What ought to be or should be is determined by historical/social context.

< Message edited by vincentML -- 2/20/2014 9:19:38 AM >

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/20/2014 12:40:23 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

When, then, is it moral to apply justice inequitably?


'When you're dispensing justice towards two entities that don't have equal moral standing' I guess would be my answer to that. People commonly believe that a human has higher moral standing than an (-other) animal; a slave was once seen as being worth less moral consideration than his owner; a black person was once seen as having less moral standing than a white person; likewise women than men, people who have a different religion, language or culture to one's own; people of a 'lower social class'; etc, etc.

I've always imagined that the line 'do unto others as you'd have them do unto you' was pretty essential to any system of ethics. But it can fail at the word 'others'. The line assumes that those 'others' are of equal moral standing. But humans always seem to find ways of seeing those 'others' otherwise, if they need to or even just want to.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/20/2014 2:06:35 PM   
evesgrden


Posts: 597
Joined: 6/9/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

When, then, is it moral to apply justice inequitably?


'When you're dispensing justice towards two entities that don't have equal moral standing' I guess would be my answer to that. People commonly believe that a human has higher moral standing than an (-other) animal; a slave was once seen as being worth less moral consideration than his owner; a black person was once seen as having less moral standing than a white person; likewise women than men, people who have a different religion, language or culture to one's own; people of a 'lower social class'; etc, etc.

I've always imagined that the line 'do unto others as you'd have them do unto you' was pretty essential to any system of ethics. But it can fail at the word 'others'. The line assumes that those 'others' are of equal moral standing. But humans always seem to find ways of seeing those 'others' otherwise, if they need to or even just want to.



I don't quite see it that way. If one takes the universal perspective, e.g., it is wrong to kill another human being, you have the problem of dealing with the person who helps a dying loved one end it through euthanasia, the person whose brakes failed so they hit a pedestrian, the person who shoots a cashier for $50.00 and a laugh, the sniper who takes out a kidnapper.

And then again, there's Sophie's Choice. The lesser of two evils. (but who decides which is the lesser, and based on what rule?)

Thou shalt not kill.

It's relative. And even that's not an answer, not really. Everything I come up with, I can outargue myself. I can create a scenario in my mind which would make my argument fall apart.


lol.. just occurred to me that it's a sorry day when you continually lose arguments with yourself......that's wrong, yeah but that's wrong too, yeah ok but that's wrong too...

Ok Sybil... can Eves come out now?

Serious subject matter but geeze there's no clean answer



_____________________________

What you permit, you promote.

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/20/2014 2:17:28 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Without acceptance of the power structure to enforce it, the value is meaningless...

When power determines what is moral and what is not, might makes right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

What human behavior is intrinsically good or bad outside of the context of time, place, or culture?

If there is nothing intrinsically wrong about forced enslavement, or kidnapping, raping, and murdering children, then there are a lot of people in this world who should just shut up.

K.


< Message edited by Kirata -- 2/20/2014 3:07:08 PM >

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/20/2014 5:31:07 PM   
Zonie63


Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Without acceptance of the power structure to enforce it, the value is meaningless...

When power determines what is moral and what is not, might makes right.


I've often thought about this, but where does the "power" actually come from? Could it not also be said that right makes might? If an ideal is considered morally sound by enough people that they would be willing to go so far and band together and fight for it, would that make it "right"?

quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

What human behavior is intrinsically good or bad outside of the context of time, place, or culture?

If there is nothing intrinsically wrong about forced enslavement, or kidnapping, raping, and murdering children, then there are a lot of people in this world who should just shut up.

K.



There's another way to look at it, though. If there's nothing intrinsically wrong or right about these crimes, then I could simply decide that "I don't like these things" and take it on myself to kill anyone involved in these activities (or they would be forced to kill me), and under the same standard, there would be nothing intrinsically wrong with me taking such action. That's probably how it would be in a world without laws or moral standards.

Without really looking for some "Outside Source" for commonly held standards for human morality, it seems that there must have been a great deal of trial and error before humans could come up with any kind of standard. It would certainly explain why much of human history is replete with continual violence and war. For whatever reason, people don't like to be enslaved, kidnapped, raped, or murdered, so consequently, there are those who will invariably fight back against those who do those things.

Of course, humans can also be vengeful and retaliatory, so they might enslave, kidnap, rape, or murder anyone associated with the person who did it to them or their family. As a species, we're also pretty competitive, so there's always the desire to one up each other, and that's how things escalate. Just "getting even" (or "an eye for an eye") isn't enough. Humans can be pretty nasty when they're majorly pissed off about something. That's one thing that seems universal outside of any context of time, place, or culture.

That may be where morality flies out the window, since humans can be far too indulgent with their emotional instabilities. That's why there's still a "gray area" and why standards for human morality are still (and will always be) a work in progress. If and when we can ever figure it out and make it stick, then we'll have Utopia.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/20/2014 6:00:50 PM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Without acceptance of the power structure to enforce it, the value is meaningless...

When power determines what is moral and what is not, might makes right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

What human behavior is intrinsically good or bad outside of the context of time, place, or culture?

If there is nothing intrinsically wrong about forced enslavement, or kidnapping, raping, and murdering children, then there are a lot of people in this world who should just shut up.

K.


This position can be arrived at through self interest. No one wants "forced enslavement, or kidnapping, raping, and murdering children' to happen to them and/or theirs. The simplest way to achieve this is to make it wrong/immoral for all.

Once the rules are agreed, the best way of ensuring their permanence is to place authorship of the rules beyond the ability of humans to influence or change said authoriship, usually a deity or Nature or similar construct.

Seen from this perspective morality becomes /status quo's method of justifying itself and its power, and an efficienct system of ensuring compliance (self regulation) from those subject to power or status quo.

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 2/20/2014 6:14:40 PM >

_____________________________



(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/20/2014 6:07:53 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

I've often thought about this, but where does the "power" actually come from? Could it not also be said that right makes might? If an ideal is considered morally sound by enough people that they would be willing to go so far and band together and fight for it, would that make it "right"?

Sort of like three wolves and a sheep voting on what is moral to eat? I don't think so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

Without really looking for some "Outside Source" for commonly held standards for human morality... people don't like to be enslaved, kidnapped, raped, or murdered

Indeed. You will find that many Atheists and Humanists subscribe to the ethical position that moral absolutes exist, and it is precisely that view that informs Human Rights theory (human rights theory is a form of moral absolutism). Moral absolutes are standards against which actions may be judged, and Human Rights theory seeks to advance competent moral standards for human behavior that acknowledge the existence of inalienable rights to which all people are entitled.

K.


< Message edited by Kirata -- 2/20/2014 6:45:00 PM >

(in reply to Zonie63)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/20/2014 6:29:29 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Once the rules are agreed, the best way of ensuring their permanence is to place authorship of the rules beyond the ability of humans to influence or change said authoriship, usually a deity or Nature or similar construct.

Therein lies the value of these studies of infants. The closer we come to being able to demonstrate scientifically that empathy and fairness are inherent in human nature, and at the foundation of our nature, the more clearly we will be able to recognize how our cultures have distorted and even negated our basic humanity. And interestingly, the truth may extend farther than we think:

Moral Behavior in Animals

K.

< Message edited by Kirata -- 2/20/2014 6:36:36 PM >

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 98
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/20/2014 6:54:01 PM   
Louve00


Posts: 1674
Joined: 2/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

And you have to take into account sociopaths/ psychopaths (which both mean the same thing)
And not just theoretically but in plain everyday life we need to develop accurate tests to catch them as young as we can and *kill them.*


I learned in a book about the FBI conditioning that a sociopath is one who knows he is doing wrong and does not emotionally care about it. A psycopath is delusion and his mind has convinced himself doing wrong is the right thing to do.

There is quite a difference. The former has no regard for life...at all.
The latter thinks he is doing something "in the name of" righteousness.

I believe in babies, it is also conditioning. If a baby is not given a loving environment of learning, he would not be very tolerant of things he wanted to accomplish, or people who got in his way. If he did, he would have more tolerance, and more understanding and quite possibly appreciation for someone who worked with him in what he was thinking was a good way.

_____________________________

For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearance, as though they were realities and are often more influenced by the things that seem than by those that are. - Niccolo Machiavelli

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 99
RE: Are we born….Good? - 2/21/2014 3:32:10 AM   
Zonie63


Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

I've often thought about this, but where does the "power" actually come from? Could it not also be said that right makes might? If an ideal is considered morally sound by enough people that they would be willing to go so far and band together and fight for it, would that make it "right"?

Sort of like three wolves and a sheep voting on what is moral to eat? I don't think so.


I wasn't referring to wolves or sheep. I was referring to humans.

quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

Without really looking for some "Outside Source" for commonly held standards for human morality... people don't like to be enslaved, kidnapped, raped, or murdered

Indeed. You will find that many Atheists and Humanists subscribe to the ethical position that moral absolutes exist, and it is precisely that view that informs Human Rights theory (human rights theory is a form of moral absolutism). Moral absolutes are standards against which actions may be judged, and Human Rights theory seeks to advance competent moral standards for human behavior that acknowledge the existence of inalienable rights to which all people are entitled.

K.



But then, if morality is absolute, then power has to be absolute, which is what the concept of "God" implies - absolute power which is eternal and unchanging throughout time and space. The concept also implies that human beings are too fallible and not qualified to be able to judge morality objectively. So, even if there is an absolute morality, religion implies that humans can't possibly know what it is. Only "God" is supposed to know these things. Besides, humans are also "on the playing field," and one can't be a referee and a player in the same game.

But since that's not a very practical way of running a society, humans have had to "wing it" all these eons, without any firm or consistent idea of morality.


< Message edited by Zonie63 -- 2/21/2014 3:35:33 AM >

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Are we born….Good? Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125