january 22 2013 thinkers crowd_001
Welcome to Thinkers!
[2013/01/22 15:34]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Hi Enapa!
[2013/01/22 15:34]  Enapa Pennell: 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:34]  Extropia DaSilva: This week the discussion is…
[2013/01/22 15:34]  Mirage Saenz: hi Rhia– sorry I was off in space
[2013/01/22 15:34]  Extropia DaSilva: Why should one believe that there is any objective truth in the realm of values and morality?
[2013/01/22 15:35]  Enapa Pennell: Hi Rhi
[2013/01/22 15:35]  Object: Hi Extropia DaSilva! Touch me for Menu. Say /1a to Adjust.
[2013/01/22 15:35]  ArtCrash Exonar: I know I know….. Cuz!
[2013/01/22 15:35]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me complains about the usage oif the word “believe” in that sentence.
[2013/01/22 15:35]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: *of
[2013/01/22 15:35]  Extropia DaSilva: what is wrong with it, Gwyn?
[2013/01/22 15:35]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Well, why would one deny that? Let’s turn it around.
[2013/01/22 15:35]  Ivy Sunkiller: why should anyone believe there is any objective math that says 2+2=4?
[2013/01/22 15:35]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: It implies that objective truth is a question of belief 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:35]  ArtCrash Exonar: Replace the word objective with functional
[2013/01/22 15:35]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me points Extie at Ivy’s argument
[2013/01/22 15:35]  Ivy Sunkiller: I wouldn’t do that Art
[2013/01/22 15:36]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Gwyn, well, objective truth can be believed or not believed, true.
[2013/01/22 15:36]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ok, functional is fine
[2013/01/22 15:36]  Ivy Sunkiller: /me nods at Rhi
[2013/01/22 15:36]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: If objective true caqn be believed OR not believed, than that statement is always true 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:36]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Unless you mean an exclusive or 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:36]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Well, but it doesn’t mean the same, quite. Falsehoods can be functional. Plato, Voltaire, Irving Kristol and Adolf Hitler all thought so
[2013/01/22 15:36]  Extropia DaSilva: Postmodernists like me only believe in subjectve truth, Gwyn:)
[2013/01/22 15:37]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I don’t believe even in that….
[2013/01/22 15:37]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I don’t believe in belief 🙂 hehe
[2013/01/22 15:37]  ArtCrash Exonar: functional truth is composed of things that work, not from your personal context but from the point of view of an outside observer.
[2013/01/22 15:37]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Extie, but since some people don’t believe in subjective truth, and if all truth is subjective, they are right, then we have objective truth. Quod erat demonstrandum
[2013/01/22 15:37]  Extropia DaSilva: Well I think there is the wrong way and MY way. Hah!
[2013/01/22 15:37]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I like that very much, Art.
[2013/01/22 15:37]  Ivy Sunkiller: I don’t believe in faith, but I do have tons of beliefs
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Extropia DaSilva: But is morality more than what we believe to be right?
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Ivy Sunkiller: more or less rooted in evidence, but no matter 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ok. Point granted, ivy.
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Art, but is truth then not context dependent?
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Mirage Saenz: do you have faith in your belief?
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Ivy Sunkiller: Mirage: no
[2013/01/22 15:38]  ArtCrash Exonar: “I don’t believe in faith” is an excellent quote Ivy
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Zobeid Zuma: Or belief in your faith? 😀
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Extropia DaSilva: How can you not have faith in what you believe?
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Ivy Sunkiller: because
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Ivy Sunkiller: *DRUMROLL*
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Ivy Sunkiller: I can be wrong
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Extropia DaSilva: But it makes no sense.
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Well, because your beliefs might be shake… sometimes you have faith in them, sometikmes not hehe
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Faith is the witness to things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen.
[2013/01/22 15:38]  Mirage Saenz: right– this is all semantic wordplay
[2013/01/22 15:39]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me is definitely straying away from the issue
[2013/01/22 15:39]  ArtCrash Exonar: It is self contradicting in just the right way…. heh
[2013/01/22 15:39]  Ivy Sunkiller: faith is belief without evidence
[2013/01/22 15:39]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Faith is evidence of things unseen, Ivyh. Not quite the same thing.
[2013/01/22 15:39]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): If I have faith in my partner, then I know she will act in certain ways, even if I’m not around.
[2013/01/22 15:39]  Ivy Sunkiller: Faith is anything but evidence Rhi
[2013/01/22 15:39]  ArtCrash Exonar: If you have evidence, is it faith?
[2013/01/22 15:39]  Extropia DaSilva: Is it not just the foundation of belief? I mean, we all need faith, right?
[2013/01/22 15:39]  Ivy Sunkiller: Art: no
[2013/01/22 15:40]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Now, using Art’s definition of functional truth… or, if you prefer, conventional truth: what a group of people, for the sake of the argument, declares “truth” to be, in order to have a functional worldview… then, aye, in that context I’d say there is good grounds for defining ‘morality’
[2013/01/22 15:40]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): It is a kind of evidence in it’s own right, Ivy
[2013/01/22 15:40]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Hi TR!
[2013/01/22 15:40]  Extropia DaSilva: Hello TR:)
[2013/01/22 15:40]  Ivy Sunkiller: Rhi: no, faith stands in conflict to evidence
[2013/01/22 15:40]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me has faith TR is around, even if she isn’t seeing her.
[2013/01/22 15:40]  TR Amat: Hi
[2013/01/22 15:40]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): /me blinks at Gwyn’s slight of hand–going from functional to conventional
[2013/01/22 15:40]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Faith also means “confidence”, not only “blind faith”
[2013/01/22 15:40]  <<UrbanizeD>> Armchair “Emanuelle’s Sisters” // Pure Mono: Restricted to owner only!
[2013/01/22 15:41]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Faith can be blind or informed.
[2013/01/22 15:41]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me grins @ Rhi and kicks a few behaviourists under the rug
[2013/01/22 15:41]  ArtCrash Exonar: Discovering the tautology of “faith is believe in things which are not see, which are true” was the concept that drove me away from religion starting at the age of about 12 or 13
[2013/01/22 15:41]  Extropia DaSilva: But Ivy, how many people actually believe in something that is contrary to evidence as they interpret it?
[2013/01/22 15:41]  Mirage Saenz: /me is having a brain freeze
[2013/01/22 15:41]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Functionality has replaced conformity in psychoanalysis, if that’s relevant to anything
[2013/01/22 15:41]  Ivy Sunkiller: is belief that earth is 6000 years old informed? 😛
[2013/01/22 15:41]  Zobeid Zuma: “I have gained this from philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law.” — Aristotle
[2013/01/22 15:41]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I agree with you on that Art, hehe
[2013/01/22 15:41]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Rhi: so I’ve heard 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:42]  TR Amat: Past a certain point, just just have to have/are left with faith?
[2013/01/22 15:42]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Ivy, sure, it’s informed by scripture.
[2013/01/22 15:42]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Interesting, Zo, that is so reminescent of Poiaget/Kohlberg… now I know where they got their ideas from
[2013/01/22 15:42]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: *Piaget
[2013/01/22 15:42]  Extropia DaSilva: Piaget. I have heard of him.
[2013/01/22 15:42]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Yeah, most good ideas are from either Aristotle or Plato.
[2013/01/22 15:42]  Ivy Sunkiller: Rhi: then, given that the scripture is no evidence, I can agree with you on that definition 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:43]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Well, actually, since you have to read scripture from a position of faith, faith is what informs scripture, not the other way around.
[2013/01/22 15:43]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I so totally agree, Rhi. I was discussing causality the other day, and noticed that we’re still using Aristotle’s definition of ‘substantial causality’, when there are most definitely others… but Aristotle’s views stuck
[2013/01/22 15:43]  ArtCrash Exonar: All the of most deep thinking of the Religious intellectuals admit that Faith is outside of evidence. They take the ‘leap’ anyway. Even though from my point of view that is intellectually dishonest.
[2013/01/22 15:43]  Extropia DaSilva: we are not here to discuss the Bible, btw:)
[2013/01/22 15:43]  TR Amat: Aristotle sounds a bit existentialist. 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:43]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: On his worse days, yes, TR 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:43]  Zobeid Zuma: So, it seems apparent to me that morality enables people to live together with peace and some degree of cooperation, instead of just fighting all the time. It’s a necessary part of the social structure.
[2013/01/22 15:43]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: See, that would be a good functional definition.
[2013/01/22 15:44]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): But they are using a modern or even post modern concept of faith, Art. Originally, faith was the “witness to things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen.”
[2013/01/22 15:44]  Ivy Sunkiller: on objective morality -> morality is objective because the consequences of one’s actions are objective
[2013/01/22 15:44]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): This from Paul, who on his way to Damascus to persecute Christians, ran into the long dead Jesus
[2013/01/22 15:44]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: We can assume, from a functiuonal point of view, that “constantly fighting” and “killing each other” doesn’t bring much happiness to members of a society. So from there we can extrapolate a common morality.
[2013/01/22 15:44]  Extropia DaSilva: OK. But if there was a culture who engaged in pursuits considered by our culture to be unnaceptably immoral, but which is fine according to their system…are they wrong?
[2013/01/22 15:44]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Well, if you mean functionality objective value to the species, sure
[2013/01/22 15:45]  ArtCrash Exonar: Morality is actually culturally defined and is the result of long traditions of function in some sense. Morality does NOT come from religion, though religion gets its morality from its culture.
[2013/01/22 15:45]  Ivy Sunkiller: you can cast a subjective moral judgement, but whether that moral judgement turns out to be morally good or bad is outside of your, or anyone else’s, scope
[2013/01/22 15:45]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Depends, Extropia. I would use first the criterium for functionality.
[2013/01/22 15:45]  TR Amat: /me has faith things will eventually rez. 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:45]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Extie, if they are dysfunctional, like the Ik! tribe, yes
[2013/01/22 15:45]  Extropia DaSilva: On what does it depend?
[2013/01/22 15:45]  Zobeid Zuma: Yeah, religion is incidental to morality.
[2013/01/22 15:45]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: E.g. a society where everybody is allowed to kill everybody else without any punishment, is it functional?
[2013/01/22 15:45]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Me thinks not.
[2013/01/22 15:46]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I even think such a society woulkd disappear quickly 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:46]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Gwyn, Aescylus didn’t think so; that’s why Athena came down and had the first trial by jury.
[2013/01/22 15:46]  Extropia DaSilva: Oh, so you mean a society that can survive?
[2013/01/22 15:46]  Ivy Sunkiller: I don’t think morality is defined by culture, culture can define it’s moral code, but it does not make that code moral
[2013/01/22 15:46]  ArtCrash Exonar: Cultural morality is internalized and doesn’t need enforcement. It is different than law in that sense.
[2013/01/22 15:46]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Extie: aye, that would be a good definition.
[2013/01/22 15:46]  Enapa Pennell: There were many tribal communities with something close to Lasse Faire.
[2013/01/22 15:46]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me *nods* @ Art
[2013/01/22 15:46]  ArtCrash Exonar: Cultural mores existed long before religions.
[2013/01/22 15:46]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): And cultural morality can be criticized, which indicates a higher point of view than culture. We can tell that Sharia is wrong, for instance, at least in it’s traditional interpretation
[2013/01/22 15:46]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Hi Teleo
[2013/01/22 15:47]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Enapa: if they were long-lived, then I would say that Laissez Faire is an acceptable morality.
[2013/01/22 15:47]  Teleo Aeon: hi
[2013/01/22 15:47]  Ivy Sunkiller: /me nods at Rhi again
[2013/01/22 15:47]  Extropia DaSilva: Yeah Art and some animals have what we might call ‘proto-morality’.
[2013/01/22 15:47]  Zobeid Zuma: “Laws are sand, customs are rock. Laws can be evaded and punishment escaped, but an openly transgressed custom brings sure punishment. The penalty may be unfair, unrighteous, illogical, and a cruelty; no matter, it will be inflicted, just the same.” — Mark Twain
[2013/01/22 15:47]  TR Amat: Some morality is derived from biology, think.
[2013/01/22 15:47]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Very true, Extie! Specially gregarious animals.
[2013/01/22 15:47]  Enapa Pennell: exactly.. our “laws” are recent inventions
[2013/01/22 15:47]  Ivy Sunkiller: chimps have essentially human (or at least human-children) level sense of fairness
[2013/01/22 15:47]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): So do dogs, Ivy
[2013/01/22 15:47]  ArtCrash Exonar: Cultural facts as defined by anthropology are called mores.
[2013/01/22 15:47]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Zo is full of great quotes today!
[2013/01/22 15:47]  Ivy Sunkiller: no, not really
[2013/01/22 15:48]  Ivy Sunkiller: Dogs have empathy, sure, but they don’t really have non-egoistic sense of fairness that humans (and chimps) have
[2013/01/22 15:48]  ArtCrash Exonar: We have subverted today’s topic, haven’t we? What is it?
[2013/01/22 15:48]  Extropia DaSilva: There is also the argument that much of the Bible would be considered outrageously immoral by our standards, and so how do we choose which parts to follow and which to reject? The Bible itself does not say and so the moral system we use must come from elsewhere.
[2013/01/22 15:49]  Extropia DaSilva: Oh the topic..
[2013/01/22 15:49]  Extropia DaSilva: Why should one believe that there is any objective truth in the realm of values and morality?
[2013/01/22 15:49]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I would say that morality (even before laws) step in as soon as a society is wise enough to take a look around and see what makes people more or less happy — and provides some guidelines to promote happiness, and avoid excessive unhappiness. And these guidelines are “universal” or “absolute” for certain very specific issues
[2013/01/22 15:49]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): I don’t think so, Art; we are evaluating the claim that there is an objective morality; Gwyn has suggested substituting ‘functionality’ for objective, and we’re evaluating that
[2013/01/22 15:49]  Ivy Sunkiller: Extie: catholic church already cherrypicks morality from the bible, has been doing so for a long time
[2013/01/22 15:50]  Extropia DaSilva: Yeah well as far as I am concerned it is all made up anyway.
[2013/01/22 15:50]  Zobeid Zuma: That’s hardly limited to Catholics.
[2013/01/22 15:50]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: So-called scriptures that are ‘revealed’ require interpretation, something that literalists have a great difficulty of understanding 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:50]  Ivy Sunkiller: just an example Zo 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:50]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Yeah, but again by a kind of functionality criteria–when they became an Imperial Church, they realized that to say–we must have peace would fall on deaf ears. So they came up with the just war doctrine, which approximated the ideal
[2013/01/22 15:50]  ArtCrash Exonar: All churches interpret their beliefs through the filter of their culture. Catholicism is not the same in different cultures, as much as Rome would like it to be.
[2013/01/22 15:50]  Extropia DaSilva: Yeah Zo. Religions evolve and a conception of God that is meaningful to one generation may be meaningless to another.
[2013/01/22 15:51]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Correction: *some* religions evolve 😉
[2013/01/22 15:51]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /sni
[2013/01/22 15:51]  Extropia DaSilva: No. All.
[2013/01/22 15:51]  Mirage Saenz: So called scriptures are interpreted but nobody claims they are fact-based
[2013/01/22 15:51]  Zobeid Zuma: Some evolve and some just fade away.
[2013/01/22 15:51]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Aww. My gestures are broken on the CHUI viewer!
[2013/01/22 15:51]  Ivy Sunkiller: some religions evolve, other die out 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:51]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Gwyn, yes, so in some ways my use of Sharia was in error. The Egyptian Constitution (proposed) which said it upholds women’s equality as long as it’s not inconsistent with Sharia is not as laughable as it sounds, given feminist interpretations of Sharia
[2013/01/22 15:51]  Extropia DaSilva: Same difference.
[2013/01/22 15:51]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Mmh that’s a very interesting example, Rhi
[2013/01/22 15:51]  Zobeid Zuma: Sounds meaningless to me.
[2013/01/22 15:52]  Zobeid Zuma: “We uphold women’s equality except when we don’t.”
[2013/01/22 15:52]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Yeah, I think what’s-his-face was wise to not fight the battle of feminism at the constitutional level; let it evolve democratically
[2013/01/22 15:52]  Enapa Pennell: a refrain if I ever heard one
[2013/01/22 15:52]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): No, not exactly, Zo, as there are feminist interpretations of the Koran
[2013/01/22 15:52]  ArtCrash Exonar: I would like to chime in here and point out that we not confuse morality with religious rules. I would point out that morality is internalized in each person through a complex mix of instruction in whatever culture a person is part of.
[2013/01/22 15:52]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): It means that we don’t fight it at the constitutional level
[2013/01/22 15:53]  Ivy Sunkiller: /me nods at Art
[2013/01/22 15:53]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Good point, Art
[2013/01/22 15:53]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Zo: sounds like the Western world to me 😉
[2013/01/22 15:53]  Zobeid Zuma: Then why mention it at all?
[2013/01/22 15:53]  Ivy Sunkiller: I’d go even further and say we don’t confuse morality with any set of rules
[2013/01/22 15:53]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Hear, hear, Art
[2013/01/22 15:53]  Ivy Sunkiller: cultural or not
[2013/01/22 15:53]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): /me waves at TR
[2013/01/22 15:53]  Zobeid Zuma: It sounds like they were trying to appease both sides with words that were contradictory.
[2013/01/22 15:53]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Well… morality does imply a “set of rules”
[2013/01/22 15:53]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Zo: politicians ㋡ tee hee
[2013/01/22 15:53]  Ivy Sunkiller: you can have a moral code that says that lying is bad, and then find an example of a situation where lying is morally good
[2013/01/22 15:53]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Gwyn, only in a rules-ethics. lol
[2013/01/22 15:54]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ha. Right, Rhi
[2013/01/22 15:54]  ArtCrash Exonar: Ivy, except I think that one’s own rules might be a definition of one’s personal morality.
[2013/01/22 15:54]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Ivy, yes, which means that you can test moral judgments or theories by intuitions
[2013/01/22 15:54]  Mirage Saenz: We all agree then, that morality is in the mind of the beholder?
[2013/01/22 15:54]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I love that expression, Mirage!
[2013/01/22 15:54]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Mirage, my sense is that no one here actually agrees to that
[2013/01/22 15:55]  Mirage Saenz: But that’s what Art said.
[2013/01/22 15:55]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Even though I don’t agree 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:55]  Mirage Saenz: And others nodded.
[2013/01/22 15:55]  ArtCrash Exonar: Mirage, I would agree with that.
[2013/01/22 15:55]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): We admit to cultural values, variations, exceptions, but we are looking at moral codes as functional or intuitive and as even universal
[2013/01/22 15:55]  Mirage Saenz: He just took longer to say it.
[2013/01/22 15:55]  Enapa Pennell: Isn’t the objective simply a moral aplication.
[2013/01/22 15:55]  Ivy Sunkiller: Art: you might have a moral code of some sort that you *generally* stick to, but you have to be aware of it not always being applicable
[2013/01/22 15:55]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Ivy, which means that it isn’t in the ye of the beholder
[2013/01/22 15:55]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): *eye
[2013/01/22 15:55]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Well, assuming that we’re all humans (I may raise some doubts among a few of us present here today hehe), there ARE some universals.
[2013/01/22 15:55]  TR Amat: Morality is often not internally consistent – does this mean it isn’t “rule”? 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:56]  ArtCrash Exonar: Objective means true in all cases from all points of view, so I think I would safely say morality cannot be objective.
[2013/01/22 15:56]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): And if it were, as some beholders don’t believe that, we have a nice self-contradiction
[2013/01/22 15:56]  Ivy Sunkiller: Sam Harris gave a good analogy to chess regarding that – there is a set of moves that are generally considered bad, but there are situations in which those moves can be good, or even required to win
[2013/01/22 15:56]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Under that assumption, Art, you’re obviously right (by definition)
[2013/01/22 15:56]  Ivy Sunkiller: Art: why so?
[2013/01/22 15:56]  ArtCrash Exonar: haha Gwyn
[2013/01/22 15:56]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): And neither is science, or well, anything, by that definition.
[2013/01/22 15:56]  Extropia DaSilva: Maths?
[2013/01/22 15:56]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): That’s a nice analogy of Harris’s
[2013/01/22 15:57]  Ivy Sunkiller: Art: if someone thinks that 2+2=5, does that mean that 2+2 doesn’t objectively equal to 4?
[2013/01/22 15:57]  TR Amat: Are you allowed to have human-relative universals? 🙂
[2013/01/22 15:57]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ivy: I would say that morality is more in the intention and less in the action; but., alas, that’s my world-view
[2013/01/22 15:57]  Zobeid Zuma: I think it’s more of a statistical thing.
[2013/01/22 15:57]  Enapa Pennell: The train track is a nice example
[2013/01/22 15:57]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Maths not by all points ov view in all contexts
[2013/01/22 15:57]  Extropia DaSilva: I guess not. Even maths has its axioms which cannot be proved or disproved.
[2013/01/22 15:57]  ArtCrash Exonar: No I think science strives to be true in all cases and from all points of view. It also realizes this is not ever going to be finally decided on…
[2013/01/22 15:57]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: TR: I would say so, since we do share a lot of common things. We can’t avoid being humans .)
[2013/01/22 15:57]  Enapa Pennell: from an objective view… the tracks converge and meet in the distance..
[2013/01/22 15:58]  Ivy Sunkiller: Gwyn: it’s both, really.
[2013/01/22 15:58]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Science woulf fail to be true in all cases and all points of view–unless certain principles are assumed by (gasp) faith; so it is on all fours with morality
[2013/01/22 15:58]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Art: yes, but science postulates “temporary truth”: what we have right now which pretty much fits the purpose, unless something better comes along.
[2013/01/22 15:58]  Zobeid Zuma: Follow this code and most of the time, on average, the results will be beneficial to everyone.
[2013/01/22 15:58]  Extropia DaSilva: Do you think it is possible that humanity and its post-human companions could drift towards a universally accepted moral system?
[2013/01/22 15:58]  Zobeid Zuma: But there are always exceptions.
[2013/01/22 15:58]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Gwyn, and people take that view for morality too
[2013/01/22 15:58]  Enapa Pennell: case in point, Gwyn.. The calculus “Limit”.
[2013/01/22 15:58]  Mirage Saenz: I always thought of morality as subjective only since it’s generated from one’s own cultural and societal experiences.
[2013/01/22 15:58]  Zobeid Zuma: There are always moral dilemmas.
[2013/01/22 15:58]  Extropia DaSilva: the what, Enapa?
[2013/01/22 15:58]  TR Amat: Will robots or AIs share those same “universals”?
[2013/01/22 15:59]  Extropia DaSilva: Yeah.
[2013/01/22 15:59]  ArtCrash Exonar: Rhi, science does not ever have to have all knowledge or truth, it admits to being only partially representational it will include whatever later.
[2013/01/22 15:59]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Exceptions might just mean we need a more general moral theory. “Lying is always wrong.” “Yeah, what ab out to the Gestapo when you have Jews in your attic?” But the more general principle might be “Respect persons.”
[2013/01/22 15:59]  Enapa Pennell: Newton’s divided difference, the basis of Calculous
[2013/01/22 15:59]  Ivy Sunkiller: we are pretty good at giving moral judgement to extreme cases, not so good at giving moral judgements to troublesome situations – but that doesn’t mean those situations do not have an objectively morally superior option
[2013/01/22 15:59]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Mirage: I’m yet to find a culture where things like the thought of being killed at a whim makes people happy.
[2013/01/22 15:59]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: And I’m sure we can add a few more universals there.
[2013/01/22 15:59]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Well, same for morality. We didn’t have to have moral judgments about when to pull the plug when there was no plug to pull
[2013/01/22 15:59]  Enapa Pennell: THe “limit” is imaginary, but useful. It becomes the derivitive.
[2013/01/22 16:00]  Mirage Saenz: It may not cheer a person, but culture guides a person, Gwyneth
[2013/01/22 16:00]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Rhi: I think you’re pretty much saying what I meant….
[2013/01/22 16:00]  ArtCrash Exonar: I really can’t think of one cultural more that is inviolable. Even killing. Killing is sometimes necessary.
[2013/01/22 16:00]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Well, actually, I was just thinking this–our morality becomes more universal when it comes to normal cases, and not extdreme cases
[2013/01/22 16:00]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Art: I thought about “being killed”, not about “killing”
[2013/01/22 16:00]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): I can think of one absolute right, right off the bat. No exceptions.
[2013/01/22 16:00]  Ivy Sunkiller: by extreme I meant things that are, um, obvious
[2013/01/22 16:00]  Ivy Sunkiller: like
[2013/01/22 16:00]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Go for it, Ivy! Tell us!
[2013/01/22 16:00]  Extropia DaSilva: what is it, Rhi?
[2013/01/22 16:01]  Ivy Sunkiller: raping then mutilating a child is rather obviously morally wrong
[2013/01/22 16:01]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): “Always respect persons.”
[2013/01/22 16:01]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: AH yes. That’s what I meant earlier…
[2013/01/22 16:01]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Intention is more important than external actions.
[2013/01/22 16:01]  ArtCrash Exonar: Gwyn even being killed can be violated as a rule, As in sacrificing life for your child.
[2013/01/22 16:01]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Not original with me; Hebert Morris came up with it
[2013/01/22 16:01]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: External behaviour is just a way to show others that you’re following a moral conduct
[2013/01/22 16:01]  Extropia DaSilva: what does it mean to respect persons?
[2013/01/22 16:01]  Mirage Saenz: Yet some people whose moral judgment is questionable, believe killing a child is okay
[2013/01/22 16:01]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: (but it can also be misleading!)
[2013/01/22 16:01]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): But your killing to respect the life of a child.
[2013/01/22 16:02]  Extropia DaSilva: Does it mean, be polite to people?
[2013/01/22 16:02]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Art: aye, but it would be hard to find people being HAPPY about that. They would do it by NECESSITY.
[2013/01/22 16:02]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Yes, as it is universal and abstract, it is more vague than specific ones. But like obscenity, you know it when you see it
[2013/01/22 16:02]  Ivy Sunkiller: Mirage: which only means they give a bad moral judgment, or have bad moral compass, however you want to name it. It doesn’t change the fact that what they do is morally wrong (or good).
[2013/01/22 16:02]  TR Amat: Moarality includes rights to ranged weapons in crowded urban areas? (because someone was going to mention that 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:02]  ArtCrash Exonar: I came to terms with what my own morality was when I left my religious beliefs behind. Turns out my own morality comes from my cuture mostly and my life experience. But unlike following a list of rules. My morality doesn’t need enforcement. It is me doing what is me.
[2013/01/22 16:03]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Extie: it would INCLUDE that too, but not necessarily MEAN that. For example, a mother respecting her child might use harsh language to protect the child from harm “Don’t cross the road when cars are speeding by, you idiot!”
[2013/01/22 16:03]  Mirage Saenz: Ivy to them, their acts ARE moral.
[2013/01/22 16:03]  Enapa Pennell: The Romans used to “expose” children.
[2013/01/22 16:03]  Enapa Pennell: Morality changes
[2013/01/22 16:03]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Well, Extie, let’s take a moral rule that is nearly absolute but isn’t, to clarify. “Never torture.” Thgat’s even stronger than “Thous halt not kill” But suppose you needed to gtorture to find where the H bomb under NY was? Respect persons would mean that the tortured fellow should be sent, afterwards, to that Swedish clinic for torture victims.
[2013/01/22 16:03]  ArtCrash Exonar: I totally concede that morality is changeable.
[2013/01/22 16:03]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ah, Art, but then you’re at what Kohlberg states to be the fifth state of morality, when people do what is right and do not need others to tell them what is right 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:04]  Extropia DaSilva: If a baby were not taught ANY morality, do you think it would grow to be an immoral adult or would this person have some kind of moral system inherited from evolution? Written into her genes sort of thing?
[2013/01/22 16:04]  Ivy Sunkiller: MIrage: *to them* – we started from this very point, objective things are the way they are regardless of what someone thinks about them
[2013/01/22 16:04]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Extie: Piaget and Kohlberg actually tested that….
[2013/01/22 16:04]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Even though Kohlberg’s theories are questionable, he claims that kids go ‘naturally’ through a few levels of morality
[2013/01/22 16:05]  Extropia DaSilva: I mean to say, are we inherently good or bad, or are those labels inhenerntly meaningless?
[2013/01/22 16:05]  Ivy Sunkiller: Extie: as long as it’s not taught anything immoral, it should have the general sense of fairness that’s in our evolutionary hardwiring, yes
[2013/01/22 16:05]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: e.g. “do whatever you wish, so far as you don’t get caught”, that kind of thing
[2013/01/22 16:05]  Extropia DaSilva: Yeah that is my morality, pretty much.
[2013/01/22 16:05]  ArtCrash Exonar: Never torture is an easy moral rule….. because it has been shown that torture doesn’t yield results. Whereas rational persuasion, does. i.e. appealling to the person’s own sense of morality.
[2013/01/22 16:05]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: On the other hand, a lot of more recent studies show that kids are generally altruistic and cooperative until they start getting an education 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:05]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Yeah, and it is a relatively low level of morality to be a relativist for Kohlberg
[2013/01/22 16:05]  Zobeid Zuma: I thought about that scenario, Rhi. And of course the logical thing to do, if you really believe that’s at stake, would be to torture them and then submit yourself to whatever punishment is your due.
[2013/01/22 16:05]  TR Amat: You could arue a claim that babies without fully developed brains aren’tyet huan… and ge lynchd…)
[2013/01/22 16:05]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Extie: level 2 for you 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:06]  Extropia DaSilva: IT yeilds results, Art. It gets you the answer you wanted to hear.
[2013/01/22 16:06]  Ivy Sunkiller: yay for IT!
[2013/01/22 16:06]  ArtCrash Exonar: yes, extie, true… haha
[2013/01/22 16:06]  Mirage Saenz: I cannot think of morality as objective– with only one truth. As we have been discussing OVER and OVER, different people for value judgments using their moral compasses– and they vary widely.
[2013/01/22 16:06]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Zo, yes, but to respect persons, you restore them to their former selves–that’s why you would have to give them therapy
[2013/01/22 16:06]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: heh Ivy 😀
[2013/01/22 16:06]  Zobeid Zuma: What irks me is the CIA saying “it’s critically important that we be able to do this”, but it’s not important enough for them to stick their necks out.
[2013/01/22 16:06]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): And yes, you should submit yourself to punishment too
[2013/01/22 16:06]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Hi LED!
[2013/01/22 16:06]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Hi Rev!
[2013/01/22 16:06]  Ivy Sunkiller: Mirage: if you define morality as maximizing wellbeing of conscious creatures – then yes, it is objective
[2013/01/22 16:07]  ArtCrash Exonar: I think we can agree that morality is different for those in different cultures. And therefore not objective outside of those cultures.
[2013/01/22 16:07]  Extropia DaSilva: Torture is most frightening when you do not know what answer you should give. Hence the skin crawling ‘Marathon Man’ with the enigmatic question ‘is it safe’?
[2013/01/22 16:07]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Mirage: they vary widely in some things, yes. But MOST cultures start from things like what Rhi is saying. “respect people” is a common morality throughout all cultures
[2013/01/22 16:07]  Mirage Saenz: That is democracy, Ivy, not morality lol.
[2013/01/22 16:07]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): But then, as there are cultures–such as the arab, that maintain that morality is absolute, it follows then that, as they are right, morality is absolute
[2013/01/22 16:07]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ivy: really? heh. I disagree 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:07]  Ivy Sunkiller: Mirage: not even close to democracy
[2013/01/22 16:08]  Ivy Sunkiller: I might think that stabbing someone with a knife is morally good, but in the end it’s not up to me wether that increases your wellbeing or not
[2013/01/22 16:08]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): brb i need to change viewers
[2013/01/22 16:08]  Extropia DaSilva: kk
[2013/01/22 16:08]  TR Amat: Is an objective viewpoint even theoreticaly possible?
[2013/01/22 16:09]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Ivy, the thing is about a moral judgment is that it has to be justified. Stabbing someone with a knife would have to be justified to be moral
[2013/01/22 16:09]  Extropia DaSilva: I do not know, TR.
[2013/01/22 16:09]  Mirage Saenz: If your morality guides you into murder by knife — it’s still your moral code, whether others agree or not, Ivy.
[2013/01/22 16:09]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Not in ARt’s definition, TR, I don’t think
[2013/01/22 16:09]  Zobeid Zuma: For something that’s an “absolute”, they sure seem to get into a lot of arguments with one another about it.
[2013/01/22 16:09]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Nah, Ivy. To be honest, I don’t think that anyone believes that stabbing someone else is good for THEM. What they believe is that stabbing someone else might, at least temporarily, be good for ME (i.e the person wielding the knife)
[2013/01/22 16:09]  Extropia DaSilva: I guess a viewpoint has got to be SUBJECTIVE, no?
[2013/01/22 16:09]  Sky Albanese: stabbing has been proved to be harmfull —
[2013/01/22 16:09]  Ivy Sunkiller: Rhi: that’s a problem of complex consequences, if I stabbed hitler with a knife it could have been a good thing
[2013/01/22 16:09]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Zo, yes, they do
[2013/01/22 16:09]  ArtCrash Exonar: Speaking of torture, I saw the film “Zero Dark Thirty” this week and thought it was excellent. It did a good job of pointing out the flaws ‘moral thinking’ from many points of view. I recommend it.
[2013/01/22 16:09]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ivy: but not for Hitler!
[2013/01/22 16:10]  Extropia DaSilva: Was Hitler immoral, objectively?
[2013/01/22 16:10]  TR Amat: Are knife weilders a cut above the rest? 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:10]  Mirage Saenz: Why can’t stabbing a person be justified internally by the individual? Is morality a collective thing? Do we all vote on it?
[2013/01/22 16:10]  Ivy Sunkiller: my point is that it doesn’t matter what I think is good, or what my subjective morality is
[2013/01/22 16:10]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Ivy, yes. There was a story that Rosalyn read about a mother whose baby was in dire straights. The doctors worked long and hard; you were rooting for the baby. The puncline, “Yes, Mrs. Hitler, little Adolf is going to be just fine.”
[2013/01/22 16:10]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Not in his own words, Extie 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:10]  Zobeid Zuma: A lot of failures in society seem to come from people not facing responsibility for their actions.
[2013/01/22 16:10]  ArtCrash Exonar: Hitler was a psychopath, and psychopaths in general lack a sense of morality.
[2013/01/22 16:10]  Extropia DaSilva: I am going to have a stab at coming up with a worse pun than TR’s…
[2013/01/22 16:10]  Ivy Sunkiller: let me turn this around – have you ever done anything you thought to be good, and then be proven otherwise?
[2013/01/22 16:10]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: hehe Rhi
[2013/01/22 16:11]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: TR’s pun was GREAT!
[2013/01/22 16:11]  Extropia DaSilva: good question, Ivy!
[2013/01/22 16:11]  Zobeid Zuma: Yeah, psychopaths are an interesting phenomenon… It’s a form of brain damage, I think. :/
[2013/01/22 16:11]  Mirage Saenz: My own moral compass is what I have to live with whethers others agree or not.
[2013/01/22 16:11]  Extropia DaSilva: Yes it is, Zo.
[2013/01/22 16:11]  TR Amat: Pointed. 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:11]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Well, was he? He said that it was his honor to be Germany’s leader and if he *ever* led Germany into a war they couldn’t win, he would commit suicide. He ultimately kept his promise. That makes him better than most dodern democratic leaders.
[2013/01/22 16:11]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): *modern
[2013/01/22 16:11]  ArtCrash Exonar: Knife wielders are a cut above Gun toters.
[2013/01/22 16:11]  Ivy Sunkiller: Mirage: agreed, but that doesn’t mean it’s perfect, does it?
[2013/01/22 16:11]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ivy: of course. But that’s not the point for my own morality; what matters to me is that my INTENTION was good. I was just IGNORANT about the consequences.
[2013/01/22 16:12]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Art, but guntotors get more bang out of life
[2013/01/22 16:12]  ArtCrash Exonar: haha
[2013/01/22 16:12]  Mirage Saenz: I think we all are confusing laws with morals.
[2013/01/22 16:12]  Extropia DaSilva: there is a difference?
[2013/01/22 16:12]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Gwyn, yes, back to Kant–the only absolute good is a good will; it is always good and pure, and absolute then
[2013/01/22 16:12]  ArtCrash Exonar: Hugh Hefner gets the most bang out of life….
[2013/01/22 16:12]  Zobeid Zuma: I think suicide was the easy way out for him, by the time it came to that.
[2013/01/22 16:12]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): And it’s expression can give you an absolute form to moral judgments–and hence a way to criticize moral judgments
[2013/01/22 16:13]  TR Amat: Don’t bring a knife to a morality fight? 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:13]  Sky Albanese: he even killed his dog
[2013/01/22 16:13]  Extropia DaSilva: I say good riddance. I never liked Hitler.
[2013/01/22 16:13]  ArtCrash Exonar: haha TR
[2013/01/22 16:13]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): TR, lol!
[2013/01/22 16:13]  Ivy Sunkiller: Gwyn: if you do something absolutely horrible in good intentions – say have your child killed because you think it’s morally good as she turned away from allah – is it moral?
[2013/01/22 16:13]  Mirage Saenz: I have to go change for tennis — see you all later. And I will bring my own morality with me lol.
[2013/01/22 16:13]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: What I think is that my point can be summarised pretty much this way: it’s not about what I do that is good for ME. It’s what I do that I think that’s good for OTHERS. Thus, there is no way I can morally justify to MYSELF stabbing someone, because that someone will definitely NOT like it, even if I get a round of applause from the whole society.
[2013/01/22 16:14]  Ivy Sunkiller: I think you can be immoral by ignorance
[2013/01/22 16:14]  Extropia DaSilva: Ok Bye! Have a nice game, hope you get Match point!
[2013/01/22 16:14]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): In so far as it was a good inention, yes, Ivy. But the form of a good intention–the Golden Rule, would say it’s not. Can you say “yes, I will want to be killed for not believing in a religion”
[2013/01/22 16:14]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): yes ivy agreed
[2013/01/22 16:14]  Zobeid Zuma: Well, I certainly can’t buy into that, Gwyn.
[2013/01/22 16:14]  TR Amat: Aposty is it?
[2013/01/22 16:14]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ivy: from an outsider’s perspective, sure, it’s immoral 😀
[2013/01/22 16:14]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Works for a lot of us, Zo 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:15]  ArtCrash Exonar: Ivy: it could be moral from the point of view of the doer, but that does not mean that ANYone else would think so, and holding the doer responsible by the others is their morality. So it boils down to power. I hat when Nietzche is right…… sigh
[2013/01/22 16:15]  Ivy Sunkiller: Gwyn: and so it is from objective morality’s pov
[2013/01/22 16:15]  Ivy Sunkiller: BADUMCHING
[2013/01/22 16:15]  Mirage Saenz: [Trapped by a naked woman]
[2013/01/22 16:15]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I didn’t follow that, Ivy.
[2013/01/22 16:15]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Explain it to me again, please 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:15]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): morality chances, evalves
[2013/01/22 16:15]  Zobeid Zuma: So let’s say somebody came to attack you… You wouldn’t fight back, because you know they won’t like that?
[2013/01/22 16:16]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Mirage, ?
[2013/01/22 16:16]  Ivy Sunkiller: I can try, but Harris would do a better job than me I guess 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:16]  Sky Albanese: what if you are attacked with a pointed stick
[2013/01/22 16:16]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): what was moral for my perants generation is no longer moral
[2013/01/22 16:16]  TR Amat: Naked women an be (morallly) inconvenient. 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:16]  ArtCrash Exonar: The great thing about your personal morality is that you don’t have to worry about other’s morality when deciding moral arguments! heh
[2013/01/22 16:16]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Heh Zo. To answer that, I’d need to explain a LOT of things first 🙂 This discussion event is too short for that.
[2013/01/22 16:17]  Extropia DaSilva: Really Emmanual? What did they consider moral that you do not?
[2013/01/22 16:17]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): I think I’ve been vaguely insulted somehow. ::looks searchingly at TR::
[2013/01/22 16:17]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): morality is being corrupted by the excuses og relitivism
[2013/01/22 16:17]  Zobeid Zuma: Oh, the convoluted rationales we come up with to justify simple things!
[2013/01/22 16:17]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Ivy, perhaps, but who cares about Harris; he’s not here–you are.
[2013/01/22 16:17]  Extropia DaSilva: But if morality is not objective it MUST be relative, surely?
[2013/01/22 16:18]  Ivy Sunkiller: in principle, there is a morally best or optimal outcome to any situation, and so when contemplating your actions and it’s consequences you do a moral judgement that tries to draw to that optimal solution
[2013/01/22 16:18]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Wow; Talk about the fallacy of the false dilemma.
[2013/01/22 16:18]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: But I could try to shorten it a bit. If I got attacked, and that person were caught, they would go to jail if they killed me, and they certainly wouldn’t like that. So preventing the attack would actually benefit them more — and I would do my best to do just that.
[2013/01/22 16:18]  Zobeid Zuma: I think the greatest talent of the human mind is for rationalization. It’s all about doing what we feel like and then figuring out a way to justify it.
[2013/01/22 16:18]  Ivy Sunkiller: Rhi: thank you for stating the obvious while I was typing :p
[2013/01/22 16:18]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Zo: I’m afraid you’re SO right about that.
[2013/01/22 16:18]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): It can be subjectively universal; or it may be built into our conceptual framework, and thus universal to us
[2013/01/22 16:18]  TR Amat: [16:15] Mirage Saenz: [Trapped by a naked woman]
[2013/01/22 16:19]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I like that, subjectively universal.
[2013/01/22 16:19]  ArtCrash Exonar: I would like to point out a difference between internalized morality and externalized rule based ‘morality’. I don’t think they are the same thing at all. You don’t violate your own internalized morality, because that is what you ‘are’.
[2013/01/22 16:19]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Ivy, ultimately, philosophy is the science of stating the obvious, and annoying everyone else, as you are obviously right, then
[2013/01/22 16:19]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): morality is intended to be bassed in universal truth, whiche is undermined by the excuses of liberal thinking relitivism
[2013/01/22 16:19]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Agreed, Art. That’s why I talked about intention vs. action. I’m with you on that.
[2013/01/22 16:19]  Ivy Sunkiller: Rhi: I’ll keep to my definition of philosophy being “bad science”
[2013/01/22 16:19]  Ivy Sunkiller: 😉
[2013/01/22 16:19]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): may i post something im working on?
[2013/01/22 16:20]  Extropia DaSilva: But it is never ACTUALLY based on universal truth. We have been arguing that it is impossible for morality to be objective, after all.
[2013/01/22 16:20]  Extropia DaSilva: You may!
[2013/01/22 16:20]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Rhi: I’ll agree with the first part “the science of stating the obvious” 🙂 On the other part, “annoying everybody else”, well, that’s not the philosopher’s fault 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:20]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Art, yes, that’s about authenticiy and self mastery and that is really what Nietzche meant by power (addressed to whoever it was who said, ‘hate it when Nietzche is right.’)
[2013/01/22 16:20]  Extropia DaSilva: But you only have ten minutes before I close proceedings.
[2013/01/22 16:20]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Gwyn, true enough
[2013/01/22 16:20]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Go for it, Emmanuel!
[2013/01/22 16:20]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): We are escalating into chaos. Liberalism is wanting to blame the symptomatic tool. {Guns} Which diverts attention from the cause. 60 Years of increased systematic removal of essential cognitive masculine leadership from the core of society, the home. Affecting the social and political structure of civil order. Even the recovering alcoholic and drug addict knows that the alcohol or drugs aren’t the problem, but the symptom. That the problem, what is commonly known in addiction recovery as “A feelings disease” Emotional disorder. Is a direct domestic, social and political result of increasing emotionalism replacing sound cognitive leadership. Choosing immediate gratification without consideration for outcome. Giving birth to the focus upon relativism. The excuse to avoid structural civil order.
[2013/01/22 16:21]  ArtCrash Exonar: hahaha
[2013/01/22 16:21]  TR Amat: I thought science was “natural philosophy” Ivy? 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:21]  ArtCrash Exonar: You and your masculinity can shove it.
[2013/01/22 16:21]  Extropia DaSilva: So is objectivism the opposite of relativism?
[2013/01/22 16:21]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): yes art
[2013/01/22 16:22]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): I cant, We can!
[2013/01/22 16:22]  Sky Albanese: objectivism?
[2013/01/22 16:22]  Ivy Sunkiller: science is about what we know or can know, philosophy is about everything else
[2013/01/22 16:22]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): /me now realizes what Obama meant by ‘Yes, we can.”
[2013/01/22 16:22]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Mmh. Certianly the more a society puts the focus on self-gratification, the less ‘moral’ it seems from an outsider’s perspective (or an unusually wise insider)
[2013/01/22 16:23]  Ivy Sunkiller: and if science can tackle objective morality, and I think it can, then that stops being a subject for philosophy :]
[2013/01/22 16:23]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Ivy, yes, but everything else includes–what is science and what is philosophy. lol
[2013/01/22 16:23]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ivy: philosophy is about what we THINK we know 🙂 lol
[2013/01/22 16:23]  Extropia DaSilva: yeah. Objectivism. The philosophical system invented by Ayn Rand. Rhi here can probably tell you all about it.
[2013/01/22 16:23]  ArtCrash Exonar: I guess you named yourself well then, eh ‘Lord’?
[2013/01/22 16:23]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): what we know is that the applied order use to work, and that there is increasingly no moral civil order being applied
[2013/01/22 16:23]  Sky Albanese: i know what it is, i was wondering why you were asking if it is the opossite if relativism
[2013/01/22 16:24]  TR Amat: Issues of having the confidence (and mental tools) to handle a changing society?
[2013/01/22 16:24]  Extropia DaSilva: ‘cuz it sounds like it is.
[2013/01/22 16:24]  Sky Albanese: ok
[2013/01/22 16:24]  ArtCrash Exonar: Back to the good old days, eh Lord? Sorry, male dominance is over, get used to it.
[2013/01/22 16:24]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ah Ivy. I have a long-standing issue with some positivists about that 🙂 I’ve asked them to produce a moral code derived from science (which is rather easy to do), but they refuse, telling me that morals are based on random definitions which are mutually agreed upon 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:24]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): As a way to facilitate discussion, Sky. So what is objectivism vs relativism?
[2013/01/22 16:24]  Ivy Sunkiller: I don’t think there being objective morality is in confict with subjective morality of a unit
[2013/01/22 16:24]  Extropia DaSilva: you know..objective..relative, they have opposing meanings.
[2013/01/22 16:24]  Teleo Aeon: one objective claim to morality is obviously some archetypal deity who’s revealed laws and rules reflect the objective truth. That deity is the human metaphysical faculty. many people believe that. but it’s not something you could objectively prove in scientific terms.
[2013/01/22 16:24]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: e.g. they hate “science by consensus” but defend “morality by consensus”. You can take a look at their associations’ website
[2013/01/22 16:24]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Positivism, the only philosophy that can be proven wrong by it’s own premises. And that is a distinction
[2013/01/22 16:25]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: lol Rhi — you must tell me more about that!
[2013/01/22 16:25]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Well, it’s simple. Postivists believe that the only truth or meaning is through verification. But since you can’t verify that…
[2013/01/22 16:26]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): (That’s the short version.)
[2013/01/22 16:26]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Teleo: the problem with that assertion is that the archetypal deity may, in fact, know about some objective truth, but it (or he, or she) most definitely is unable to convey it to their human minions, who have to rely on personal interpretations 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:26]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ohhhh I love that, Rhi! loil
[2013/01/22 16:26]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me makes a note in BOLD
[2013/01/22 16:26]  Extropia DaSilva: I thought it meant something like ‘the calculations of quantum physics work but as to WHY they work, we shall never know’?
[2013/01/22 16:26]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Gwyn, but TEleo has a point–when he said that the deity could be a human ‘metaphysical faculty.’ I like that
[2013/01/22 16:27]  Ivy Sunkiller: Teleo: objective morality is an argument for religion, and it’s a good one (or at last convincing for many people). If we reject religion, we do need to replace it with something, be it a secular objective morality, or a secular universal morality
[2013/01/22 16:27]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: A reification of one of our faculties? I cannot disagree with that, either
[2013/01/22 16:27]  Extropia DaSilva: Or, to put it more bluntly, ‘shut up and calculate’.
[2013/01/22 16:27]  TR Amat: Logical Positivism shot itself in its own metaphysical foot?
[2013/01/22 16:27]  Zobeid Zuma: Yeah, the minions keep mis-interpreting Lord Inglip’s messages.
[2013/01/22 16:27]  Teleo Aeon: thanks Rhi.. that was a qualification
[2013/01/22 16:27]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: TR: looks like it! heh
[2013/01/22 16:27]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): There are those who still follow an objective morality. Yet increasingly outnumbered by those who create there loberal relitive psudo moralities, leading into chaos
[2013/01/22 16:27]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me adores Rhi, she knows everything about philosophy 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:27]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): liberal
[2013/01/22 16:27]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): /me smiles at Gwyn and whispers a ‘your welcome’ to Teleo
[2013/01/22 16:27]  Ivy Sunkiller: what’s wrong with being liberal?
[2013/01/22 16:28]  ArtCrash Exonar: haha
[2013/01/22 16:28]  Extropia DaSilva: Folks we have three minutes in which to arrive at a universal morality that will remain unchanged even unto the breaking of the world. Crunch time, Thinkers!
[2013/01/22 16:28]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I’ll go for Rhi’s: “respect people”
[2013/01/22 16:28]  TR Amat: FSM says be moral. 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:28]  Extropia DaSilva: Yeah that is a good start.
[2013/01/22 16:28]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Well, I’ve given it to you. “Always Respect Persons” and “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” (aka the CAtegorical Imperative)
[2013/01/22 16:28]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): liberal is the desire to escape structural civil order
[2013/01/22 16:28]  Ivy Sunkiller: FSM was drunk when he made the world, that’s why it’s not perfect
[2013/01/22 16:28]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: To be honest, I tend to follow “respect beings” and not only ‘people’, but that’s fine 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:29]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Gwyn, that works
[2013/01/22 16:29]  Extropia DaSilva: My first amendmant: Be nice to people. Especially that Extie.
[2013/01/22 16:29]  Ivy Sunkiller: Emmanuel: what is civil order?
[2013/01/22 16:29]  Teleo Aeon: sure Ivy. I tend to think this pattern for searching out objective moral objects is a hold over from an earlier way we used to grasp moral ideas… I’m not that convinced that those objects would be found
[2013/01/22 16:29]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): i know this because i was liberal most of my life
[2013/01/22 16:29]  Extropia DaSilva: what made you change?
[2013/01/22 16:29]  ArtCrash Exonar: Structural civil order was created by liberal thinking.
[2013/01/22 16:29]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me is always nice to Extoie, and considers herself very moral-ish about that
[2013/01/22 16:29]  Teleo Aeon: and Gwyneth .. quite
[2013/01/22 16:29]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): Extie, good correlary.
[2013/01/22 16:29]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): So we’ve made progress in just 45 minutes
[2013/01/22 16:29]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Not too bad, for a change 😀
[2013/01/22 16:30]  Extropia DaSilva: You are. My oldest and almost bestest friend, that is Gwyn!
[2013/01/22 16:30]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Awwee
[2013/01/22 16:30]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me blushes now
[2013/01/22 16:30]  Extropia DaSilva: Silly!
[2013/01/22 16:30]  Rhiannon of the Birds (rhiannon.dragoone): You two want a private moment?
[2013/01/22 16:30]  Lord Emmanuel Davidson (lordemmanuele): i changed because i realised my libeerberal thinking was the cause of my personal problems, uppon deprogramming
[2013/01/22 16:30]  Extropia DaSilva: *Hugs her Gwynie*
[2013/01/22 16:30]  Ivy Sunkiller: Teleo: oh, I’m actually going to be first to say that they can’t be found, but it’s the process of looking for them that is important :).
[2013/01/22 16:30]  TR Amat: Liberal is the desire to deal with people as they are, not as they should be. 🙂
[2013/01/22 16:30]  Extropia DaSilva: so how would you describe yourself, now?
[2013/01/22 16:31]  Extropia DaSilva: Uhoh! I am out of time!
This entry was posted in after thinkers. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s