Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5  [ show all ]
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Supply, Demand & Morality
    #23739163 - 10/15/16 04:29 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Income is based on supply and demand economics. A labourer is paid less than an architect because the supply of architects is fewer than the demand due to the difficult training involved, while for labourers the supply is high due to the relatively little training needed and the demand is moderate. If the demand for labourers was to suddenly increase or the skills necessary to be a labourer became more complex it is not unthinkable that a labourer should be paid as much as an architect.

The above example does not create much of a moral dilemma. If your a labourer and you want better pay complete an engineering degree. But, consider the following example: a doctor is paid 100,000 dollars a year while a professional sports person is paid 1,000,000 dollars per year. The demand for competent sports people is high, but the supply is low which is why they are paid 10x the wage of the doctor. But which is really more important? The doctor saves lives while the sports person entertains. Clearly this is a moral dilemma.

Consider the following example which is not based on income. I am not sure of the actual numbers here, but I have it on good authority that this is true. Much more money is spent on the medical research for male pattern baldness than AID's research. This makes sense from a market perspective because men who are balding tend to be older and earn significant incomes, so if one does find a cure for male pattern baldness they will make a lot of money. however, morally this is reprehensible.

The real problem here is that we don't have a better way to allocate resources than supply and demand economics even though in many cases it is morally unjust. The only other kind of modern economy that has been trailed is central planning or communism which was a total disaster. So, what should we do to mitigate or erase these negative moral manifestations of supply and demand economics?


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinetump
ban the undead
 User Gallery


Registered: 03/17/16
Posts: 2,383
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23739187 - 10/15/16 05:03 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

More money is made no matter the cost is your problem with the world. Poor people become bald too. Its a numbers game and there is high supply of sports people that just get weeded out. Why pick adds research why not something more deadly faster acting. Because its not common. Hiv isn't even common but people have heard of it. Money spent has nothing to do with morals.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: tump]
    #23739191 - 10/15/16 05:10 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

The point is that the system of supply and demand doesn't always work for the greater good. Do you agree?


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23739198 - 10/15/16 05:22 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:
Income is based on supply and demand economics. A labourer is paid less than an architect because the supply of architects is fewer than the demand due to the difficult training involved,
...



did you know that a wide range of income happens to architects, from zero (thousands of architects are unemployed) to millions of dollars (a few hundred architects in the world have high salaries, and their work is very business oriented)

you can't be so glib as to reference an architect or a doctor and make that mean much more than a person with training and experience in such fields to emphasize an unrelated political position. it is too dehumanizing. some doctors save lives while others can barely pay attention to a sick patient and the nurse does everything.

When it comes to getting a job it is what you bring to the table, and that is largely experience: experience is very valuable. The story and how it is told is most important.

"supply and demand" is an approach that denigrates all the offerings  to enable a pitch for some idea.
the fault in that approach is that it begins by depersonalizing everything. Is it too hard to have a politics in which people and their stories are respected?


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefalcon
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,005
Last seen: 1 day, 5 hours
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23740211 - 10/15/16 03:20 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

I doubt that it's true that more money is spent on research for male pattern baldness, I doubt that very much money is spent at all on research. The great amounts of money spent on baldness are by individuals as treatment such as transplants.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23740437 - 10/15/16 05:03 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Is it too hard to have a politics in which people and their stories are respected?

When your dealing with millions of people, yes it is hard to have a politics in which people and their stories are respected.


did you know that a wide range of income happens to architects, from zero (thousands of architects are unemployed) to millions of dollars (a few hundred architects in the world have high salaries, and their work is very business oriented)

you can't be so glib as to reference an architect or a doctor and make that mean much more than a person with training and experience in such fields to emphasize an unrelated political position. it is too dehumanizing. some doctors save lives while others can barely pay attention to a sick patient and the nurse does everything.

When it comes to getting a job it is what you bring to the table, and that is largely experience: experience is very valuable.


Sure, this is all true, but supply and demand can still explain income gaps if you exclude capital gains which is a different story. How about you adress the second example regarding resources spent on research. Do you think it is morally acceptable to spend the same resources researching male pattern baldness as AID's?


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23740482 - 10/15/16 05:26 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

what about football?
the crowds want football
how much research goes into football and the merchandise of football?

aids is big, but literacy is bigger! how much research goes into literacy?


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23740498 - 10/15/16 05:33 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

You've hit the nail on the head my friend. Demand for football is high, does this mean that the same amount of money and resources should be spent on football as literacy programs? To me this creates a moral dilemma as I believe that literacy programs are more important than football despite the fact that according to a supply and demand model football may be more important than literacy.

But, if one were to intervene in the economy to take account of this moral dilemma it would create a series of unintended consequences. So, what should be done? Your posts appear to me to indicate that you believe nothing should be done, at least not at this level.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblelaughingdog
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23740669 - 10/15/16 07:12 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:
Income is based on supply and demand economics. ...

The above example does not create much of a moral dilemma. .... The doctor saves lives while the sports person entertains. Clearly this is a moral dilemma.

Consider the following example ... Much more money is spent on the medical research for male pattern baldness than AID's research. ... however, morally this is reprehensible.

.... So, what should we do to mitigate or erase these negative moral manifestations of supply and demand economics?




much of what goes on in societies is immoral and unjust and frankly stupid

the key words in your question, INMO are "should" & "do" - as in "... what should we do to .."

these words turn a fact into a problem

there are lions and zebras, half of all organisms are parasites, etc.

much of life, and the world are not pleasant

to answer your question more specifically, those who have children generally want them to be as educated as possible - that is dealing with the world as it is, and is about as good as it gets.

"Brave New World" by Huxley examines the question, and how a future society might try to answer it. The results are not appetizing. Some other good science fiction, also examines the issue. Some of the Scandinavian socialist countries do better on some metrics of social health. Some may also have a higher suicide rate. The data is easily findible on the web.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: laughingdog]
    #23741109 - 10/15/16 11:08 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

laughingdog said:
Quote:

blingbling said:
Income is based on supply and demand economics. ...

The above example does not create much of a moral dilemma. .... The doctor saves lives while the sports person entertains. Clearly this is a moral dilemma.

Consider the following example ... Much more money is spent on the medical research for male pattern baldness than AID's research. ... however, morally this is reprehensible.

.... So, what should we do to mitigate or erase these negative moral manifestations of supply and demand economics?




much of what goes on in societies is immoral and unjust and frankly stupid

the key words in your question, INMO are "should" & "do" - as in "... what should we do to .."

these words turn a fact into a problem

there are lions and zebras, half of all organisms are parasites, etc.

much of life, and the world are not pleasant

to answer your question more specifically, those who have children generally want them to be as educated as possible - that is dealing with the world as it is, and is about as good as it gets.

"Brave New World" by Huxley examines the question, and how a future society might try to answer it. The results are not appetizing. Some other good science fiction, also examines the issue. Some of the Scandinavian socialist countries do better on some metrics of social health. Some may also have a higher suicide rate. The data is easily findible on the web.




I respect your 'survival of the fittest' type argument, but I find it unconvincing. I believe you have naturalised a moral and social phenomena in ways which mystify rather than explain.

Let me give you an example of what I mean by naturalise: Rape is a totally natural phenomena. Many species engage in rape, from singled celled organisms to the higher primates. Therefor, we should not stop rapists as they are only doing what is natural, correct?

Just because a phenomena is in some sense natural does not mean it should be tolerated.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblelaughingdog
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling] * 1
    #23741391 - 10/16/16 02:37 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:
Quote:

laughingdog said:
Quote:

blingbling said:
Income is based on supply and demand economics. ...

The above example does not create much of a moral dilemma. .... The doctor saves lives while the sports person entertains. Clearly this is a moral dilemma.

Consider the following example ... Much more money is spent on the medical research for male pattern baldness than AID's research. ... however, morally this is reprehensible.

.... So, what should we do to mitigate or erase these negative moral manifestations of supply and demand economics?




much of what goes on in societies is immoral and unjust and frankly stupid

the key words in your question, INMO are "should" & "do" - as in "... what should we do to .."

these words turn a fact into a problem

there are lions and zebras, half of all organisms are parasites, etc.

much of life, and the world are not pleasant

to answer your question more specifically, those who have children generally want them to be as educated as possible - that is dealing with the world as it is, and is about as good as it gets.

"Brave New World" by Huxley examines the question, and how a future society might try to answer it. The results are not appetizing. Some other good science fiction, also examines the issue. Some of the Scandinavian socialist countries do better on some metrics of social health. Some may also have a higher suicide rate. The data is easily findible on the web.




I respect your 'survival of the fittest' type argument, but I find it unconvincing. I believe you have naturalised a moral and social phenomena in ways which mystify rather than explain.

Let me give you an example of what I mean by naturalise: Rape is a totally natural phenomena. Many species engage in rape, from singled celled organisms to the higher primates. Therefor, we should not stop rapists as they are only doing what is natural, correct?

Just because a phenomena is in some sense natural does not mean it should be tolerated.




I refer you to aesop's fables
in particular: 'belling the cat'
humans have had war since civilization started
and torture and slaves
we currently have slavery in the usa
it's now called immigrant labor,
that's why they are kept illegal so that they have no rights, and can be forced to work in poor saftey conditions in the slaughter houses and chicken industry for example.

I'm not blind, that's all.
I don't condone this shit.
But in many ways the USA is heaven compared to the rest of the world.

I made no “'survival of the fittest' type argument”
My post was about the way things are.
It contained no comments on what should be or morality or evolution

I also did not attempt to explain why things are the way they are—as you imply: “mystify rather than explain.”

some folks make the choice to do good deeds anyway.
some folks make the choice to keep on learning anyway.
etc.
——————————
as regards “Therefor, we should not stop rapists as they are only doing what is natural, correct?
Just because a phenomena is in some sense natural does not mean it should be tolerated.”

That's the job of police right? And the cops are corrupt and on the take so that has to be fixed too right? And they would prefer to be in donut shops getting fat or giving traffic tickets, so the corrupt small town can make money, rather than doing risky stuff, and the budget has been cut, because the banks were corrupt and caused a mortgage crisis, so patrols have been cut, so the cops would rather shoot unarmed blacks - but if I say I won't tolerate rape - it will all be fixed -- come on man !

Sorry but I predict that no matter what you do with your life you will not change this. I am only the messenger. You can do good deeds, you can help some people, but  you are essentially powerless as regards the big picture.

None of the richest people, none of the smartest people, none of the kindest people, none of the most enlightened people, and none of the most powerful people have made any lasting change in ongoing human brutality, which has a history of thousands of years. Beyond what you mention child starvation is also a fact in the richest nation: the USA. And infant mortality in the USA ranks  worse than numerous other countries. Frankly the entire society is sick.

You can continue to misinterpret me, or feel indignant, but I am only the messenger of common sense, reminding you of what you already know.

By all means devote your life to the service of your fellow man, if you like.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: laughingdog]
    #23741455 - 10/16/16 04:30 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

you say this:

in many ways the USA is heaven compared to the rest of the world.

and then this:

That's the job of police right? And the cops are corrupt and on the take so that has to be fixed too right? And they would prefer to be in donut shops getting fat or giving traffic tickets, so the corrupt small town can make money, rather than doing risky stuff, and the budget has been cut, because the banks were corrupt and caused a mortgage crisis, so patrols have been cut, so the cops would rather shoot unarmed blacks - but if I say I won't tolerate rape - it will all be fixed -- come on man !


Beyond what you mention child starvation is also a fact in the richest nation: the USA. And infant mortality in the USA ranks  worse than numerous other countries. Frankly the entire society is sick.


If the USA is practically heaven according to you then I would hate to see hell.

To be concise, I think you are overstating how bad things truely are when viewed through the scope of history. Things are actually getting better, at least economically and morally.

And your right, nothing will probably come of this, but its still fun to think about. It poses an interesting puzzle if your into that kind of thing.

Also, the fact that you brought up other animals, loins, zebra's, parasites etc. Indicates to me that you are essentializing immoral economic behaviour in a quasi-naturalistic way.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblelaughingdog
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling] * 1
    #23741539 - 10/16/16 06:46 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:


Also, the fact that you brought up other animals, loins, zebra's, parasites etc. Indicates to me that you are essentializing immoral economic behaviour in a quasi-naturalistic way.




I don't know what you mean by "essentializing"

I simply point out the entire physical universe is amoral not immoral. An important difference.
Morality is a human conception.
It's not just biology that is inherently painful, so are earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, volcanoes, plagues, tornadoes hurricanes.

you keep trying to justify projecting a value system, and assume others must be doing the same thing.
I keep trying to point out that, that, is what you are doing.
Also I point out that the world is beyond your control and always will be. Life is a very vulnerable and brief affair, trembling with sensitivity. We are not even in control of the physical sensations that are arising in our own bodies moment to moment.

I am not a Buddhist, but think the dude pretty much got it right.
Suffering/dissatisfaction/unsatisfactoriness is inherent in both the human condition, and that of all sentient beings. According to B we are all subject to disease, old age, infirmity, pain and finally death. Everyone we know will die. All animals kill and eat other life forms, often while they are still alive. There is nothing romantic about this. Amazing yes. Many beautiful forms yes. But pretending it is all marvelous, because human vanity wants to believe itself is the pinnacle of something wonderful, is a fantasy I cannot indulge in.

The only way out, is to start, by in so far as possible, not taking it all personally. And secondly by seeing that what we take to be a 'self' is not our self. I won't go into the whole Buddhist rap.

The fact that of course we don't like this reality, has nothing to do with its factuality. I didn't create this state of affairs. Finding fault with the messenger will change nothing.

As regards your statement "To be concise, I think you are overstating how bad things truely are when viewed through the scope of history. Things are actually getting better, at least economically and morally. "  easy to say from the comfort of the first world ... so lets step outside it - virtually:

we start here , & don't even have to spend a penny to buy a ticket, just need the willingness and curiosity to open our eyes.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=dump+india&t=h_&iax=1&ia=images

then do more image searches of things like ghetto brazil, & gold mines Brazil
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=brazil%2C+gold+mines&t=h_&iar=images&iax=1&ia=images

and doing some research on refugee camps in africa, prisons in Russia and Turkey, stoneings in arab countries, genital mutilation of women, human trafficking, starvation, access to unpolluted drinking water etc.--- we find this is all human caused misery -- we are not even touching on shit like leprosy, malaria, ebola, etc -- yes much of human life is pure hell -- shocking no doubt to those who in live in the 'gated community' called middle class America - where the question is which mall or restaurant to go to today.

And if we consider the planet and rate of species extinction, ocean acidification, presently going on the idea that "Things are actually getting better" really seems a stretch; not to mention terrible air quality in cities, fracking, fukashima, and nuclear power plants near fault lines in the USA. I could go on & on but there's no point in doing so. If the planet goes to hell so do economics and morality.

Seems the best we can do is first do no harm, then if possible be kind, and if educated use our knowledge to help in some small way.

It's rather amusing that the best, some of the billionares can come up with, is building space ships, perhaps to go to mars and colonize. How can they be so smart and so dumb at the same time? Maybe excessive wealth causes some forms of stupidity?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: laughingdog] * 1
    #23741579 - 10/16/16 07:17 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

I am trying to see the point of this thread and to tie it back to the title but the repartee is not clarifying the main idea.

I think the main idea is resolving the moral gap, or prioritization of interest/investment in matters that need the most attention for humanity (and the planet).

I actually see that the moral gap is more of a time delay in a recognition gap in face of a plurality of individual and group based interest/investment behaviors and that money (which is only part of the investment) is distracting the thoughts:

take, for instance, football (historically consider gladiators in Rome). The state interest is placated by distracting the masses with vigorous meaningless physical engagement. 2000 years later it is the same but less bloody. I would call this a slow moral advance, in the face of what seems wildly amoral, but actually is functional.

Rape, on the other hand is not in the same category, except at times of war when everything is amoral and terrible - war should not happen - football helps prevent war and rape you could say.

is thinking at this scale immoral?

back to supply and demand - I think a systems view needs to be taken, and morality applied to refine things like the bloody Gladiator game to the institution of Football. This takes patient creativity and understanding.

The system involves the state as an organism and the masses as tissues within it. The brain listens more to the body than it ever has, but this remains a work in progress, and I think it is core to morality, social and personal.

For Morality to work, you must choose your battles, and not exhaust the effort by launching any campaign that might have minor impacts in favor of ones that vector out more successfully. Trial and error will be involved, and if we can work out how to minimize the time gap for issues to less than a millennium, we will have done a good job.

allow that supply and demand is at play in the systems, so the thrust of my comments is to use morality in some situations to influence supply and demand, where the moral interference will have sustainable results.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: laughingdog]
    #23743561 - 10/16/16 07:00 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

laughingdog said:
Quote:

blingbling said:


Also, the fact that you brought up other animals, loins, zebra's, parasites etc. Indicates to me that you are essentializing immoral economic behaviour in a quasi-naturalistic way.




I don't know what you mean by "essentializing"

I simply point out the entire physical universe is amoral not immoral. An important difference.
Morality is a human conception.
It's not just biology that is inherently painful, so are earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, volcanoes, plagues, tornadoes hurricanes.

you keep trying to justify projecting a value system, and assume others must be doing the same thing.
I keep trying to point out that, that, is what you are doing.
Also I point out that the world is beyond your control and always will be. Life is a very vulnerable and brief affair, trembling with sensitivity. We are not even in control of the physical sensations that are arising in our own bodies moment to moment.

I am not a Buddhist, but think the dude pretty much got it right.
Suffering/dissatisfaction/unsatisfactoriness is inherent in both the human condition, and that of all sentient beings. According to B we are all subject to disease, old age, infirmity, pain and finally death. Everyone we know will die. All animals kill and eat other life forms, often while they are still alive. There is nothing romantic about this. Amazing yes. Many beautiful forms yes. But pretending it is all marvelous, because human vanity wants to believe itself is the pinnacle of something wonderful, is a fantasy I cannot indulge in.

The only way out, is to start, by in so far as possible, not taking it all personally. And secondly by seeing that what we take to be a 'self' is not our self. I won't go into the whole Buddhist rap.

The fact that of course we don't like this reality, has nothing to do with its factuality. I didn't create this state of affairs. Finding fault with the messenger will change nothing.

As regards your statement "To be concise, I think you are overstating how bad things truely are when viewed through the scope of history. Things are actually getting better, at least economically and morally. "  easy to say from the comfort of the first world ... so lets step outside it - virtually:

we start here , & don't even have to spend a penny to buy a ticket, just need the willingness and curiosity to open our eyes.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=dump+india&t=h_&iax=1&ia=images

then do more image searches of things like ghetto brazil, & gold mines Brazil
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=brazil%2C+gold+mines&t=h_&iar=images&iax=1&ia=images

and doing some research on refugee camps in africa, prisons in Russia and Turkey, stoneings in arab countries, genital mutilation of women, human trafficking, starvation, access to unpolluted drinking water etc.--- we find this is all human caused misery -- we are not even touching on shit like leprosy, malaria, ebola, etc -- yes much of human life is pure hell -- shocking no doubt to those who in live in the 'gated community' called middle class America - where the question is which mall or restaurant to go to today.

And if we consider the planet and rate of species extinction, ocean acidification, presently going on the idea that "Things are actually getting better" really seems a stretch; not to mention terrible air quality in cities, fracking, fukashima, and nuclear power plants near fault lines in the USA. I could go on & on but there's no point in doing so. If the planet goes to hell so do economics and morality.

Seems the best we can do is first do no harm, then if possible be kind, and if educated use our knowledge to help in some small way.

It's rather amusing that the best, some of the billionares can come up with, is building space ships, perhaps to go to mars and colonize. How can they be so smart and so dumb at the same time? Maybe excessive wealth causes some forms of stupidity?




You've pointed out a lot of terrible things in the world and I'm not trying to deny them, but equating economic behaviour with earthquakes and pretor, prey, and parasitic relations just mystifies what are in fact social, rather than biological or geological relations. Obviously these things cannot be fully pulled apart as there is only one reality, but I don't think it is a useful metaphor. Your essentializing in the sense that there is nothing we can really do to stop biology or geology, but social relations are relatively flexible at least in comparison with these other domains of human knowledge.

I am skeptical whenever someone tries to equate human social relations with either "Gods will on earth" or because its "natural" as both of these phases are often used as cover for immoral behaviour.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23743594 - 10/16/16 07:10 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)


Quote:

redgreenvines said:
I am trying to see the point of this thread and to tie it back to the title but the repartee is not clarifying the main idea.

I think the main idea is resolving the moral gap, or prioritization of interest/investment in matters that need the most attention for humanity (and the planet).

I actually see that the moral gap is more of a time delay in a recognition gap in face of a plurality of individual and group based interest/investment behaviors and that money (which is only part of the investment) is distracting the thoughts:

take, for instance, football (historically consider gladiators in Rome). The state interest is placated by distracting the masses with vigorous meaningless physical engagement. 2000 years later it is the same but less bloody. I would call this a slow moral advance, in the face of what seems wildly amoral, but actually is functional.

Rape, on the other hand is not in the same category, except at times of war when everything is amoral and terrible - war should not happen - football helps prevent war and rape you could say.

is thinking at this scale immoral?

back to supply and demand - I think a systems view needs to be taken, and morality applied to refine things like the bloody Gladiator game to the institution of Football. This takes patient creativity and understanding.

The system involves the state as an organism and the masses as tissues within it. The brain listens more to the body than it ever has, but this remains a work in progress, and I think it is core to morality, social and personal.

For Morality to work, you must choose your battles, and not exhaust the effort by launching any campaign that might have minor impacts in favor of ones that vector out more successfully. Trial and error will be involved, and if we can work out how to minimize the time gap for issues to less than a millennium, we will have done a good job.

allow that supply and demand is at play in the systems, so the thrust of my comments is to use morality in some situations to influence supply and demand, where the moral interference will have sustainable results.




Do you think we should have state interventions in the economy when supply and demand economics forces people to act in ways that do not promote the greater good? What do you think that would look like? I think state intervention would probably be the only way this could be done.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23743865 - 10/16/16 08:41 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

I think the state has to slowly evolve from a mere protectionist  regional agency (from invasions and destabilizations) to the provider and custodian of human rights and freedoms within its regional authority according to a slowly evolving charter of human rights.

a part of this process may occasionally involve adjustments to existing enforced laws when, by avoidance of said adjustment, long term reduction of human rights will ensue or peace in the land will be threatened.

interference with supply and demand and any other observed interactions may fall into this category of adjustment, but the purpose of said adjustment has to tie directly to clear and substantiated lasting impacts on the peace in the land and integrity of human rights and freedoms.

at this point in time the rights should include basic food water shelter clothing education and medical services as well as freedoms from slavery, mental, physical and sexual abuse and discrimination attributed to age, ability, physical appearance and sex etc.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblelaughingdog
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling] * 1
    #23744211 - 10/16/16 11:15 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

QUOTE: "Your essentializing in the sense that there is nothing we can really do to stop biology or geology, but social relations are relatively flexible at least in comparison with these other domains of human knowledge.

I am skeptical whenever someone tries to equate human social relations with either "Gods will on earth" or because its "natural" as both of these phases are often used as cover for immoral behaviour. "

------

Perhaps where we are failing to connect, is that you are interested in theory - and I am not - but you think I am.

I simply point out that it seems to me that "social relations" don't seem to me as flexible as they seem to you. In this country there has been grid lock in Washington for what? about 8 years? with government shut downs - a real mess - now there's an election coming up and the politicians all pretend that they and government can fix things. And some drink the cool aid. And I left out over 200 years of racial prejudice, now escalating again!

So while I agree with your sentiments, I do not believe theory will fix anything, and hear no novel or implementable solutions here. So while it may make good conversation to analyze problems and propose theoretical solutions I don't drink this brand of cool aid either.

Whether we look at the Roman Empire, the Mayan Empire, the Aztec Empire, or any others, we see no escape from certain cycles and mistakes. Once again they are all being repeated, but with worse consequences due to greater world wide population density, amazing advances in technology and weapons and continuous wars.

Because many believe we live in a democracy, in the USA, they believe concomitantly that their choices are powerful. Hopefully we do have some power of choice, in our lives. But when it comes to the big picture, History, anthropology, and archaeology seem to tell a different story. As they say those who don't study history are condemned to repeat it. Our leaders are rather poorly educated, and our culture promotes consummation and entertainment not education.
Bush's idea of giving the third world democracy, was not only arrogant and ironic, but also doomed to failure do to lack of education in those countries. Unfortunately the public is so poorly educated in this country, in many ways , including matters like critical thinking and values and psychology, that great things are not really possible here either in my view.

Lastly it is amusing that you continue to dress me in clothes that are not mine -""Gods will on earth" or because its "natural""

What a joke - either read what I actually say without extrapolating if you want to dialogue...
or for your own sake read some good science on the subject like Marvin Harris and perhaps some history of wars during say the last hundred years & then a thousand years, doesn't take much,it's on the internet. Then the question might be answered if there has ever been a time when humans weren't at war. This is not philosophy.
And Marvin Harris is both a good read and good science.

I would think having a little  curiosity about stuff like world wide arms sales, lobbying, currency wars and manipulation, computer hacking, what's gone on with Guantanamo bay, exported CIA torture, the School of the Americas, why we have hundreds of military bases world wide, etc. would disabuse most anyone of thinking that getting a few folks on a message board to agree with them about theory will initiate meaningful change.

'Doctors without boarders' are some guys and gals that are into action; it is possible to do some modest amount of good by making a commitment.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23747713 - 10/18/16 12:28 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

redgreenvines said:
I think the state has to slowly evolve from a mere protectionist  regional agency (from invasions and destabilizations) to the provider and custodian of human rights and freedoms within its regional authority according to a slowly evolving charter of human rights.

a part of this process may occasionally involve adjustments to existing enforced laws when, by avoidance of said adjustment, long term reduction of human rights will ensue or peace in the land will be threatened.

interference with supply and demand and any other observed interactions may fall into this category of adjustment, but the purpose of said adjustment has to tie directly to clear and substantiated lasting impacts on the peace in the land and integrity of human rights and freedoms.

at this point in time the rights should include basic food water shelter clothing education and medical services as well as freedoms from slavery, mental, physical and sexual abuse and discrimination attributed to age, ability, physical appearance and sex etc.




Do you think that immoral economic behaviour like when supply and demand economics fails to promote the greater good is a violation of human rights? How would you justify this?


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: laughingdog]
    #23747726 - 10/18/16 12:38 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

laughingdog said:
QUOTE: "Your essentializing in the sense that there is nothing we can really do to stop biology or geology, but social relations are relatively flexible at least in comparison with these other domains of human knowledge.

I am skeptical whenever someone tries to equate human social relations with either "Gods will on earth" or because its "natural" as both of these phases are often used as cover for immoral behaviour. "

------

Perhaps where we are failing to connect, is that you are interested in theory - and I am not - but you think I am.

I simply point out that it seems to me that "social relations" don't seem to me as flexible as they seem to you. In this country there has been grid lock in Washington for what? about 8 years? with government shut downs - a real mess - now there's an election coming up and the politicians all pretend that they and government can fix things. And some drink the cool aid. And I left out over 200 years of racial prejudice, now escalating again!

So while I agree with your sentiments, I do not believe theory will fix anything, and hear no novel or implementable solutions here. So while it may make good conversation to analyze problems and propose theoretical solutions I don't drink this brand of cool aid either.

Whether we look at the Roman Empire, the Mayan Empire, the Aztec Empire, or any others, we see no escape from certain cycles and mistakes. Once again they are all being repeated, but with worse consequences due to greater world wide population density, amazing advances in technology and weapons and continuous wars.

Because many believe we live in a democracy, in the USA, they believe concomitantly that their choices are powerful. Hopefully we do have some power of choice, in our lives. But when it comes to the big picture, History, anthropology, and archaeology seem to tell a different story. As they say those who don't study history are condemned to repeat it. Our leaders are rather poorly educated, and our culture promotes consummation and entertainment not education.
Bush's idea of giving the third world democracy, was not only arrogant and ironic, but also doomed to failure do to lack of education in those countries. Unfortunately the public is so poorly educated in this country, in many ways , including matters like critical thinking and values and psychology, that great things are not really possible here either in my view.

Lastly it is amusing that you continue to dress me in clothes that are not mine -""Gods will on earth" or because its "natural""

What a joke - either read what I actually say without extrapolating if you want to dialogue...
or for your own sake read some good science on the subject like Marvin Harris and perhaps some history of wars during say the last hundred years & then a thousand years, doesn't take much,it's on the internet. Then the question might be answered if there has ever been a time when humans weren't at war. This is not philosophy.
And Marvin Harris is both a good read and good science.

I would think having a little  curiosity about stuff like world wide arms sales, lobbying, currency wars and manipulation, computer hacking, what's gone on with Guantanamo bay, exported CIA torture, the School of the Americas, why we have hundreds of military bases world wide, etc. would disabuse most anyone of thinking that getting a few folks on a message board to agree with them about theory will initiate meaningful change.

'Doctors without boarders' are some guys and gals that are into action; it is possible to do some modest amount of good by making a commitment.




Maybe you should check out steven pinker and his book The Better Angels of our Nature as it shows that when viewed in comparison to the vast sweep of history, life, at least economically and morally is getting better. I don't believe everything he says, but some of his points are undeniable in my opinion.

I don't mean to come of as pompous, but I think you should educate yourself regarding how bad things actually were just a few hundred years ago. Those times were so violent in comparison to today that it appears alien to the modern mind.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23747860 - 10/18/16 03:27 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:
...
Do you think that immoral economic behaviour like when supply and demand economics fails to promote the greater good is a violation of human rights? How would you justify this?



This is too general a question, and probably an inversion of appropriate cause and effect.

For example, tuberculosis causes death, but it is not a violation of human rights, it is a disease.

This line of thought could be construed as malaise.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23750301 - 10/18/16 09:02 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

redgreenvines said:
Quote:

blingbling said:
...
Do you think that immoral economic behaviour like when supply and demand economics fails to promote the greater good is a violation of human rights? How would you justify this?



This is too general a question, and probably an inversion of appropriate cause and effect.

For example, tuberculosis causes death, but it is not a violation of human rights, it is a disease.

This line of thought could be construed as malaise.




Again, this argument doesn't hold water. Your example is a naturalisation of what are essentially social and moral behaviours.  If human rights are for anything it is to modulate human to human behaviour. So, economic behaviour should fall into this category, correct?


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23751180 - 10/19/16 05:37 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

The more recent additions to the concept of human rights include freedom from discrimination of the following types:
gender, sexual orientation, disability, color, and age.

Legal clauses and sub-clauses that address each category and circumstance differ extensively.

One day, perhaps a complex economic section may become embedded in this type of law as well. I hope this does not get rushed and that it follows the effective establishment of food, clothing, housing, and education basic rights, otherwise, it will become confused with those requirements for human rights.

The basic rights of humanity and the freedoms of participating citizens of the realm should be considered in careful ways that clarify participation since economic rights are usually tied to and constrain participation, and discrimination affects participation.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23752268 - 10/19/16 03:02 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:
Quote:

laughingdog said:
Quote:

blingbling said:
Income is based on supply and demand economics. ...

The above example does not create much of a moral dilemma. .... The doctor saves lives while the sports person entertains. Clearly this is a moral dilemma.

Consider the following example ... Much more money is spent on the medical research for male pattern baldness than AID's research. ... however, morally this is reprehensible.

.... So, what should we do to mitigate or erase these negative moral manifestations of supply and demand economics?




much of what goes on in societies is immoral and unjust and frankly stupid

the key words in your question, INMO are "should" & "do" - as in "... what should we do to .."

these words turn a fact into a problem

there are lions and zebras, half of all organisms are parasites, etc.

much of life, and the world are not pleasant

to answer your question more specifically, those who have children generally want them to be as educated as possible - that is dealing with the world as it is, and is about as good as it gets.

"Brave New World" by Huxley examines the question, and how a future society might try to answer it. The results are not appetizing. Some other good science fiction, also examines the issue. Some of the Scandinavian socialist countries do better on some metrics of social health. Some may also have a higher suicide rate. The data is easily findible on the web.




I respect your 'survival of the fittest' type argument, but I find it unconvincing. I believe you have naturalised a moral and social phenomena in ways which mystify rather than explain.

Let me give you an example of what I mean by naturalise: Rape is a totally natural phenomena. Many species engage in rape, from singled celled organisms to the higher primates. Therefor, we should not stop rapists as they are only doing what is natural, correct?

Just because a phenomena is in some sense natural does not mean it should be tolerated.




The survival of the fittest argument in regards to natural means that nothing is inherently moral or immoral and that morals are an individual construction.

Saudia Arabia thinks it's good to devalue women, Most Western societies don't. Saudia Arabia views their practices as 'good' and Western practices as 'bad' while the West views their practices as 'good' while viewing the Arabs as 'bad'.

Good and bad are a choice of the individual.

I have raped and killed exactly 0 people because I DO NOT WANT TO RAPE OR KILL PEOPLE.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDividedQuantumM
Outer Head
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly]
    #23752294 - 10/19/16 03:11 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

sudly said:
Saudia Arabia thinks it's good to devalue women, Most Western societies don't. Saudia Arabia views their practices as 'good' and Western practices as 'bad' while the West views their practices as 'good' while viewing the Arabs as 'bad'.

Good and bad are a choice of the individual.





So sudly, do you think these moral designations are equivalent?  Do you really think neither moral view is better than the other?  I know you're a moral relativist, but would you really argue that Saudi treatment of women is just as morally sound as the Western one?  If not, that's not moral relativism, that's an objective decision.


--------------------
Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: DividedQuantum]
    #23752387 - 10/19/16 03:51 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

I think somethings are better than others but I acknowledge that the choice is mine to make as to what I think is good or bad.

I think morals are a subjective decision based on the individual interpretation of an objective observation.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDividedQuantumM
Outer Head
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly]
    #23752395 - 10/19/16 03:55 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

By saying a set of morals is subjective, you're saying morality can be any old thing, which it can't.  But I don't really care to get into it with you, and I respect your beliefs, which are close to what used to be my own.


--------------------
Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: DividedQuantum]
    #23752456 - 10/19/16 04:19 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

I never said those morals weren't influenced by culture or society.
I too believe societal morals are built from the subjective beliefs of a culture.

But you're free to believe in objective morality if you want.

I'd also ask one thing, is Vegemite good or bad?


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDividedQuantumM
Outer Head
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly]
    #23752471 - 10/19/16 04:28 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

The flavor of a food is a far cry from a moral determination.  A very far cry.


--------------------
Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: DividedQuantum]
    #23752554 - 10/19/16 04:53 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

I don't think it's any different.  :toast:

It may not be the flavour itself but how someone deals with the flavour of a food that is the moral determination.



--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly]
    #23752585 - 10/19/16 05:02 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

that's why Canada, at least, has a charter of rights and freedoms; were it left up to the public morals, it would be all over the map.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDividedQuantumM
Outer Head
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly]
    #23752593 - 10/19/16 05:03 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

You think a man's preference for food is as complex as his morality?

I just have to :shrug:


--------------------
Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23752603 - 10/19/16 05:06 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

I'm starting to think it's important to determine a difference between the morals of the state(law) and the morals of individual citizens.

I think that the law is a set of morals decided upon by leadership to protect humans from themselves. Because morals are an individual choice many people decide that they want to do things like kill or steal. Historically society has judged murder and criminal activity as a crime because it does not provide an advantage to the survival of a society.

Although the laws are set in society their origin is still from the minds of human beings.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly]
    #23753424 - 10/19/16 10:00 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

sudly said:
Quote:

blingbling said:
Quote:

laughingdog said:
Quote:

blingbling said:
Income is based on supply and demand economics. ...

The above example does not create much of a moral dilemma. .... The doctor saves lives while the sports person entertains. Clearly this is a moral dilemma.

Consider the following example ... Much more money is spent on the medical research for male pattern baldness than AID's research. ... however, morally this is reprehensible.

.... So, what should we do to mitigate or erase these negative moral manifestations of supply and demand economics?




much of what goes on in societies is immoral and unjust and frankly stupid

the key words in your question, INMO are "should" & "do" - as in "... what should we do to .."

these words turn a fact into a problem

there are lions and zebras, half of all organisms are parasites, etc.

much of life, and the world are not pleasant

to answer your question more specifically, those who have children generally want them to be as educated as possible - that is dealing with the world as it is, and is about as good as it gets.

"Brave New World" by Huxley examines the question, and how a future society might try to answer it. The results are not appetizing. Some other good science fiction, also examines the issue. Some of the Scandinavian socialist countries do better on some metrics of social health. Some may also have a higher suicide rate. The data is easily findible on the web.




I respect your 'survival of the fittest' type argument, but I find it unconvincing. I believe you have naturalised a moral and social phenomena in ways which mystify rather than explain.

Let me give you an example of what I mean by naturalise: Rape is a totally natural phenomena. Many species engage in rape, from singled celled organisms to the higher primates. Therefor, we should not stop rapists as they are only doing what is natural, correct?

Just because a phenomena is in some sense natural does not mean it should be tolerated.




The survival of the fittest argument in regards to natural means that nothing is inherently moral or immoral and that morals are an individual construction.

Saudia Arabia thinks it's good to devalue women, Most Western societies don't. Saudia Arabia views their practices as 'good' and Western practices as 'bad' while the West views their practices as 'good' while viewing the Arabs as 'bad'.

Good and bad are a choice of the individual.

I have raped and killed exactly 0 people because I DO NOT WANT TO RAPE OR KILL PEOPLE.




If you really are a moral relativist then you are basically excluding yourself from any argument regarding morality. There is nothing I or anyone can tell you that would make you value a particular moral outlook.

Its kinda like saying "I don't believe in evidence." There is no evidence I could present someone to make them believe in the usefulness of evidence. And there is no moral argument I could introduce that would make you believe the usefulness of morality. Therefor, your not really arguing about morality which was the topic of the OP.

So, continue your debates if you like, but just realise that as long as you hold fast to a morally relativist perspective your not actually engaging the topic of argument.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23753431 - 10/19/16 10:02 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

redgreenvines said:
The more recent additions to the concept of human rights include freedom from discrimination of the following types:
gender, sexual orientation, disability, color, and age.

Legal clauses and sub-clauses that address each category and circumstance differ extensively.

One day, perhaps a complex economic section may become embedded in this type of law as well. I hope this does not get rushed and that it follows the effective establishment of food, clothing, housing, and education basic rights, otherwise, it will become confused with those requirements for human rights.

The basic rights of humanity and the freedoms of participating citizens of the realm should be considered in careful ways that clarify participation since economic rights are usually tied to and constrain participation, and discrimination affects participation.




That sounds pretty vague to me. But, these are difficult questions so I appreciate your input.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23753754 - 10/20/16 12:48 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:
Quote:

sudly said:
The survival of the fittest argument in regards to natural means that nothing is inherently moral or immoral and that morals are an individual construction.

Saudia Arabia thinks it's good to devalue women, Most Western societies don't. Saudia Arabia views their practices as 'good' and Western practices as 'bad' while the West views their practices as 'good' while viewing the Arabs as 'bad'.

Good and bad are a choice of the individual.

I have raped and killed exactly 0 people because I DO NOT WANT TO RAPE OR KILL PEOPLE.




If you really are a moral relativist then you are basically excluding yourself from any argument regarding morality. There is nothing I or anyone can tell you that would make you value a particular moral outlook.

Its kinda like saying "I don't believe in evidence." There is no evidence I could present someone to make them believe in the usefulness of evidence. And there is no moral argument I could introduce that would make you believe the usefulness of morality. Therefor, your not really arguing about morality which was the topic of the OP.

So, continue your debates if you like, but just realise that as long as you hold fast to a morally relativist perspective your not actually engaging the topic of argument.



My values are based upon explicit observations and science so if you've got any of that to contribute I'd be more than happy to take it on board.

In my case it's that I only believe in evidence.
I'm not saying morality is not useful, I'm saying morality is not inherently good or bad or objective but instead a subjective construction of the human mind.

At this point my only conclusion is that your feelings have been hurt.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly]
    #23753954 - 10/20/16 03:43 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

I'm not saying morality is not useful, I'm saying morality is not inherently good or bad or objective but instead a subjective construction of the human mind.

I don't think you understand what "morality" actually means. To be moral is good, to be immoral is bad. I think what you meant to say is that someones good intentions can be actualised in ways that are immoral. This does not mean that morality itself is in question, that someone cannot act morally or immorally.


My values are based upon explicit observations and science so if you've got any of that to contribute I'd be more than happy to take it on board.

Yeah, refer to the OP. I have outlined a moral dilemma. What are your thoughts?


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23753997 - 10/20/16 04:51 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Morality is the construct of an individuals conscience.
Quote:

Morality: a particular system of values and principles of conduct.



Quote:

Conscience: a person's moral sense of right and wrong, viewed as acting as a guide to one's behaviour.




--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly]
    #23756049 - 10/20/16 08:31 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Morality is one of those words that can easily be misconstrude which is what I believe you are doing. Its kinda like the word "health" Sure health is to some degree a matter of ones individual subjective belief. But, no matter how you try to frame it, it is not healthy to be vomiting every minute of every day.

What I'm trying to say is there are boundaries to what can be considered "moral" is the same way that there are boundaries to what can be considered "health." These things are not purely a product of individual subjective experience. If you don't grant this then you are a moral relativist. Which is fine, but as I said you exclude yourself from arguing what is or is not moral.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23756065 - 10/20/16 08:37 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Health can be divided into the physical health of an individuals body and the mental health of their central nervous system(brain and spine).

Vomiting every day would be a sign of a physical abnormality, perhaps a virus or parasitic infection.

Quote:

Alahu Akbar when done before a bombing translates to 'God is Great' because those individuals who believe in Allah think it is a good thing to commit Jihad.




I think you are a generally good person but I don't think you nor I can deny that there are people in the world who have incredibly diverse ideologies and moralistic beliefs.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly] * 1
    #23756105 - 10/20/16 08:49 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

sudly said:
Health can be divided into the physical health of an individuals body and the mental health of their central nervous system(brain and spine).

Vomiting every day would be a sign of a physical abnormality, perhaps a virus or parasitic infection.

Quote:

Alahu Akbar when done before a bombing translates to 'God is Great' because those individuals who believe in Allah think it is a good thing to commit Jihad.




I think you are a generally good person but I don't think you nor I can deny that there are people in the world who have incredibly diverse ideologies and moralistic beliefs.




Are you trying to say that suicide bombing is moral? This is a perfect example of someones subjective intentions being actualised in ways that are immoral. What it is not, is an argument that morality is "all in the head" or some other such nonsense.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23756157 - 10/20/16 09:01 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Health can be divided into the physical health of an individuals body and the mental health of their central nervous system(brain and spine).

Cool, so if you want to understand where i'm coming from then just make the words health and morality synonymous in your mind. Then address the OP.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling] * 1
    #23756171 - 10/20/16 09:06 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Personally I don't think suicide bombings are moral but the people who are committing those atrocities believe that what they are doing is good in the eyes of their god Allah.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePenelope_Tree
Shamanic Panic
 User Gallery


Registered: 07/31/09
Posts: 8,535
Loc: magic sugarcastle
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly] * 1
    #23756243 - 10/20/16 09:33 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

So, what should we do to mitigate or erase these negative moral manifestations of supply and demand economics?


Capitalism is a tricky beast. On one hand, competition in the market is good. It creates innovation and other things that I'm too tired to think of right now. On the other hand, it leads to problems which you have addressed, namely that some things have a larger monetary potential than others that may not lead to advancement of a society.

To answer the question, I think some areas require government regulation. It would be absurd to say that America should erase the EPA and all the laws it mandated in favor of an "open" economy and that the "market" would take care of the environmental problems. This is patently false. A better example maybe is healthcare. In America, our weird healthcare system has become so bloated and price gouged because there is no regulation on price setting. The same MRI machine that a medical company can mark up to a clinic here in America would sell for 5x less in a country like France because the price is regulated by the government. A third example is teachers' wages. In Scandinavian countries, teachers are paid more like rockstars and less like common laborers. Getting a job in their school system is much more difficult, too, than it is here in America, taking many years and lots of stringent tests. They take it more seriously and give it the attention it deserves, being a foundation for the future of their society.

Basically, I'm for basic laws the require certain industries, basically education, healthcare, and environmental interaction, to be recognized as the cornerstones of quality human life and to take care to preserve them, make them easily accessible, and respected.


--------------------
full blown human


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: Penelope_Tree]
    #23756282 - 10/20/16 09:47 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

So do you think there should be a cap on investment into products that are purely superficial, aren't considered to promote the greater good of society?

Because unlike environmental regulation research into male pattern baldness is not necessarily immoral, it is just immoral that so much money would go into it when so little goes to AID''s research for example.

What about football vs literacy as another poster brought up? People love football, but wouldn't that money be better spent on literacy?

I'm not sure what kind of repercussions a cap on investment would create in the rest of the economy, but its an interesting idea.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23756311 - 10/20/16 09:57 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Cacao beans used to be as valuable as gold and silver.

Quote:

Chocolate was precious to the Aztecs partly because it was hard to come by at court. It did not grow in the highlands around Tenochtitlán but in the southern Mayan lowlands (even today cacao is harvested in the southern Mexican states of Chiapas and Tabasco). To the Aztecs, cacao was so precious that its seeds were used as money. According to Sophie and Michael Coe in The True History of Chocolate (1996), a single cacao bean would buy one large tomato; three beans, a newly picked avocado; 30 beans, a rabbit; and 200 beans, a turkey cock. As with any valuable coinage, cacao forgery went on. Fraudsters made fake beans from bits of avocado stone and wax.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/6194447/Aztecs-and-cacao-the-bittersweet-past-of-chocolate.html




--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePenelope_Tree
Shamanic Panic
 User Gallery


Registered: 07/31/09
Posts: 8,535
Loc: magic sugarcastle
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23756340 - 10/20/16 10:10 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Quote:

blingbling said:
So do you think there should be a cap on investment into products that are purely superficial, aren't considered to promote the greater good of society?




Because unlike environmental regulation research into male pattern baldness is not necessarily immoral, it is just immoral that so much money would go into it when so little goes to AID''s research for example.

What about football vs literacy as another poster brought up? People love football, but wouldn't that money be better spent on literacy?

I'm not sure what kind of repercussions a cap on investment would create in the rest of the economy, but its an interesting idea.




I'm not proposing that government tell people they can only pour X amount of money into a certain industry. I am saying that governments should mandate that X amount of money be poured into certain industries, like education, healthcare, environmental protection. I hope that clarifies the difference.

It probably also comes down to the way these services are managed. I think that's why so many people strike an issue with government run anything. The government has so much red tape and it takes forever for things to get done. So we look to the private sector for reprieve. However, like you point out, because of the monetary potential of certain topics vs other topics, either some very important things, like education or environmental protection, are neglected or some things are left out in the cold, like education or healthcare.

I am trying to say that some industries need to be better funded or managed or socialized. I don't think capping investments/money flow into "superficial"/private sector endeavors is required.


--------------------
full blown human


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePenelope_Tree
Shamanic Panic
 User Gallery


Registered: 07/31/09
Posts: 8,535
Loc: magic sugarcastle
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly]
    #23756343 - 10/20/16 10:11 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

sudly said:
Cacao beans used to be as valuable as gold and silver.







So glad I stopped buying stocks and started stocking up on chocolate bars :lol:


--------------------
full blown human


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleballsalsaMDiscord
Universally Loathed and Reviled
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 20,876
Loc: Foreign Lands
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23756396 - 10/20/16 10:30 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:

You've pointed out a lot of terrible things in the world and I'm not trying to deny them, but equating economic behaviour with earthquakes and pretor, prey, and parasitic relations just mystifies what are in fact social, rather than biological or geological relations. Obviously these things cannot be fully pulled apart as there is only one reality, but I don't think it is a useful metaphor. Your essentializing in the sense that there is nothing we can really do to stop biology or geology, but social relations are relatively flexible at least in comparison with these other domains of human knowledge.

I am skeptical whenever someone tries to equate human social relations with either "Gods will on earth" or because its "natural" as both of these phases are often used as cover for immoral behaviour.





behavior traits (aggression specifically) can have a genetic origin, and even be bred out through the process of domestication.  If rats or siberian foxes can have genes related to an immoral behavior(overt aggression specifically), i don't see why humans couldn't.  ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Domesticated_Red_Fox )
To go back to your rape example, one must agree that as a society we shouldn't tolerate rape, and indeed, in most places rape is a crime, yet rape exists.  The unfortunate fact is that rape may persist more or less forever, especially if the behavior is genetic in origin.


--------------------


Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly]
    #23756878 - 10/21/16 03:18 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

sudly said:
Cacao beans used to be as valuable as gold and silver.

Quote:

Chocolate was precious to the Aztecs partly because it was hard to come by at court. It did not grow in the highlands around Tenochtitlán but in the southern Mayan lowlands (even today cacao is harvested in the southern Mexican states of Chiapas and Tabasco). To the Aztecs, cacao was so precious that its seeds were used as money. According to Sophie and Michael Coe in The True History of Chocolate (1996), a single cacao bean would buy one large tomato; three beans, a newly picked avocado; 30 beans, a rabbit; and 200 beans, a turkey cock. As with any valuable coinage, cacao forgery went on. Fraudsters made fake beans from bits of avocado stone and wax.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/6194447/Aztecs-and-cacao-the-bittersweet-past-of-chocolate.html







Your point is?


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: ballsalsa]
    #23756886 - 10/21/16 03:23 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

ballsalsa said:
Quote:

blingbling said:

You've pointed out a lot of terrible things in the world and I'm not trying to deny them, but equating economic behaviour with earthquakes and pretor, prey, and parasitic relations just mystifies what are in fact social, rather than biological or geological relations. Obviously these things cannot be fully pulled apart as there is only one reality, but I don't think it is a useful metaphor. Your essentializing in the sense that there is nothing we can really do to stop biology or geology, but social relations are relatively flexible at least in comparison with these other domains of human knowledge.

I am skeptical whenever someone tries to equate human social relations with either "Gods will on earth" or because its "natural" as both of these phases are often used as cover for immoral behaviour.





behavior traits (aggression specifically) can have a genetic origin, and even be bred out through the process of domestication.  If rats or siberian foxes can have genes related to an immoral behavior(overt aggression specifically), i don't see why humans couldn't.  ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Domesticated_Red_Fox )
To go back to your rape example, one must agree that as a society we shouldn't tolerate rape, and indeed, in most places rape is a crime, yet rape exists.  The unfortunate fact is that rape may persist more or less forever, especially if the behavior is genetic in origin.




I submit to everything you've said, but humanity is capable of multiple phenotypes resulting from the same genetic information. So much so that your example has very little to do with economics.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: Penelope_Tree]
    #23756887 - 10/21/16 03:25 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Penelope_Tree said:
Quote:

Quote:

blingbling said:
So do you think there should be a cap on investment into products that are purely superficial, aren't considered to promote the greater good of society?




Because unlike environmental regulation research into male pattern baldness is not necessarily immoral, it is just immoral that so much money would go into it when so little goes to AID''s research for example.

What about football vs literacy as another poster brought up? People love football, but wouldn't that money be better spent on literacy?

I'm not sure what kind of repercussions a cap on investment would create in the rest of the economy, but its an interesting idea.




I'm not proposing that government tell people they can only pour X amount of money into a certain industry. I am saying that governments should mandate that X amount of money be poured into certain industries, like education, healthcare, environmental protection. I hope that clarifies the difference.

It probably also comes down to the way these services are managed. I think that's why so many people strike an issue with government run anything. The government has so much red tape and it takes forever for things to get done. So we look to the private sector for reprieve. However, like you point out, because of the monetary potential of certain topics vs other topics, either some very important things, like education or environmental protection, are neglected or some things are left out in the cold, like education or healthcare.

I am trying to say that some industries need to be better funded or managed or socialized. I don't think capping investments/money flow into "superficial"/private sector endeavors is required.




So is it that you don't see the problems outlined in the OP as actual problems, or that you don't see them as problems worth addressing by governments? If you still think they are problems, but problems governments can't solve, then how should they be addressed?


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23756934 - 10/21/16 03:59 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

I have been pointing at the effort made in Canada with its Charter of Rights and Freedoms (It forms the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982), to help crystallize what "Morality" is in secular terms.

The issues surrounding rape and any other transgression of personal boundaries are addressed in the Constitution, and the body of law in the country.

I think the essence of morality is the respect of people's boundaries.

Looking at genetics and the incidence of rape among wolves or other species does not change the fact that among humans, i.e. in our social order, we use a code to help regulate and limit interpersonal boundary transgressions.

The code is not simple, but the core of it is one of respect and dignity. Where supply and demand come into it at this time is more peripheral than rape, it is secondary to other transgression-al issues such as race or disability.

Law is already huge, a person could not reasonably know all the laws of the land, even a lawyer needs to be a specialist in this day and age. So we do need to have some self-regulating systems, such as supply and demand, and let core issues like human rights and freedoms blaze limits to those self-regulating systems through the court systems.

Adversarial Law needs both a Plaintiff and an Accused. Something like "supply and demand" is neither.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23757006 - 10/21/16 05:09 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

I like chocolate.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrendanFlock
Stranger
Male

Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 1 day, 7 hours
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly]
    #23759139 - 10/21/16 08:38 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

I think the most moral outcome of an economy..would be that for every persons demand..they are immediately provided with supply..to the exact degree of their demand..

And then with the courts of law and social justice we could measure the ins and outs..and then have rulling's if there are questions about legality..

Though this vision is true..we still have a ways to go socially..because there are things like drugs..that are banned from professional selling and trading markets..

So until we get all the things legalized that should be legalized...we will likely have immoral economy..and therefore immoral supply and demand..!

So the revolution is always about this..as far as I am concerned...even if it weren't..it still could merge with this as a common bio stasis..on the topics of homeostasis in general..

So the question is how can we get these things that are morally correct legalized.. and how long will it take for that to happen..until that point we will always have a certain % of ourselves left bereft..to the normal causes of causation and creation in Gods Kingdom..and ours!!


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: BrendanFlock]
    #23759176 - 10/21/16 08:53 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)



--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly]
    #23759759 - 10/22/16 01:10 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

What is the positive reason we find value in economy? Is there a first principle, in philosophy?

The merit/function of the eye is to see well, and the merit/function of thing like a blade is to cut well. These merits are not just arbitrary necessarily, but can be situated, more or less in an organically, according to a sense of purpose. They are difficult to describe at all otherwise.

But maybe we value a good eye, and a good blade, in the same sense, as mere things, and do not necessarily think much of either of them according to any general conception outside of that.

But the particular virtue still could itself, orient the purpose of the function meaningfully.

Yet again, with this possibility, it also "could" also just as well only be that we value general economy, ie. generic utility of things we get out hands on, and only as a result of this generic ideal, value merits.

Naturally both possibilities are part of life. Maybe part of the question of supply and demand and how it relates to our essential values, and morality, whether we are aware of a first principle, like for instance the essential merit of a meritocracy, or whether we come by it more derivatively. Distinguishing actual merit/or virtue as the basis of values, in a more organic way, in a way is ideally based on the particular (human being) being meaningful.

Philosophically (which is one thing) it makes sense to question our first principles, because in questioning, it means to approach them, and their actual basis, rather than just generality. But realistically, there is always the risk of the ideal, in philosophic questioning. And losing sight is not what we need...


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: Kurt]
    #23759773 - 10/22/16 01:18 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

For the same reason we value lumps of compressed carbon.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesprinkles
otd president
Other User Gallery

Registered: 10/13/12
Posts: 21,527
Loc: washington state Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 17 days
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23759799 - 10/22/16 01:34 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

good post blingbling.  it is maddening isnt it?  and reprehensible indeed.


--------------------
welcome to my world http://www.shroomery.org/forums/postlist.php/Board/326


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: BrendanFlock]
    #23759903 - 10/22/16 03:19 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

BrendanFlock said:
I think the most moral outcome of an economy..would be that for every persons demand..they are immediately provided with supply..to the exact degree of their demand..




What your describing is not actually an "economy." Economics is the study of the management of scarce resources which have alternative uses. What your describing is kind of wonderland where every wish is immediately granted.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23759904 - 10/22/16 03:21 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

redgreenvines said:
I have been pointing at the effort made in Canada with its Charter of Rights and Freedoms (It forms the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982), to help crystallize what "Morality" is in secular terms.

The issues surrounding rape and any other transgression of personal boundaries are addressed in the Constitution, and the body of law in the country.

I think the essence of morality is the respect of people's boundaries.

Looking at genetics and the incidence of rape among wolves or other species does not change the fact that among humans, i.e. in our social order, we use a code to help regulate and limit interpersonal boundary transgressions.

The code is not simple, but the core of it is one of respect and dignity. Where supply and demand come into it at this time is more peripheral than rape, it is secondary to other transgression-al issues such as race or disability.

Law is already huge, a person could not reasonably know all the laws of the land, even a lawyer needs to be a specialist in this day and age. So we do need to have some self-regulating systems, such as supply and demand, and let core issues like human rights and freedoms blaze limits to those self-regulating systems through the court systems.

Adversarial Law needs both a Plaintiff and an Accused. Something like "supply and demand" is neither.




Maybe I'm being slow, but I don't see how this addresses the moral dilemma outlined in the OP. Could you provide examples where the moral dilemma's that result from supply and demand economics can be mitigated?


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: sudly]
    #23759907 - 10/22/16 03:25 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

sudly said:
I like chocolate.





That's about as good as we can expect from a moral relativist :shrug:


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23759947 - 10/22/16 04:15 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

from your OP
Quote:

blingbling said:
The real problem here is that we don't have a better way to allocate resources than supply and demand economics even though in many cases it is morally unjust. The only other kind of modern economy that has been trailed is central planning or communism which was a total disaster. So, what should we do to mitigate or erase these negative moral manifestations of supply and demand economics?



the operative verb is "to allocate".
the term "moral" is disruptive here.
the key enabler is the right to allocate, which is alluded to but not mentioned by name, but you indicate it was "trialed" but you spelled "trailed" so it did not seem that important in the OP --- COMMUNISM.

the view on this issue therefore is a view of ownership or the morality of the right to own resources: any morality of supply and demand is actually the morality of ownership itself!
distribution can be delegated to something like UBER or AMAZON (both are neither moral nor not moral - you need, you push a button, you pay electronically at the end of the month) - but the core moral issue is the right to own or entitlement, and that extends into the very idea of personal territory, or the right to defend your stuff, and that flattens out into your legal rights and freedoms under the charter/constitution of the country in which you own these things.

Of what specifically do you need an example? I think you are better off refining your question so that it makes sense in terms of what exists.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23759959 - 10/22/16 04:29 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

(food for thought -- no response necessary)
the Positive-Incentive Perspective of Hunger is really interesting, and i think, accurate. (in terms of perspective on S&D, and Morals)

without the pleasure centers of the brain driving incentive/reward, our psychology would permit us, and our biology would permit us, to eat only minimally to rid hunger pangs, primarily because (IMO; it seems...) our bodies do not have the innate ability to tell us what it's missing in it's essential nutritional make-up, ie, what it needs in terms of satiation.

all it tells us, "ouch, hurt" -- and when we eat something, we recognize that our pangs go away, and we move on, thinking "all done". see this poses a problem: because our bodies can rid itself of pangs from minimal intake of food, and of course, still be woefully undernourished, though, biologically, one can't tell that unless you visit a doctor (obviously in human history, a pretty new concept).

sure your body will initiate it's own signals of hunger, but they are simply perceived as pains the body goes through, and to avoid it, it's as easy as eating even the tiniest bit of food -- if we live like that, we don't live long.

the reward system allows us to psychologically WANT more than we need, to the extent that we will break out backs for more (so to speak -- but a nice metaphor), which is essentially better for survival. the fact that we psychological want complimentary good food, due to our intense pleasure in eating foods, (without which there'd be no difference in which foods you eat; another important point; you'd have no preferences, so...) so, you end up wanting to mix and match -- which not only provides for awesome cuisine's within cultures, but also, a much better survival mechanism; stocking up.

just like with women. :cool: (another metaphor??? :crazy2: )
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_eating
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_medicine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_healthcare


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23759980 - 10/22/16 04:46 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:
Quote:

sudly said:
I like chocolate.





That's about as good as we can expect from a moral relativist :shrug:




I'm sorry was I supposed to reply to some sort of point?


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePenelope_Tree
Shamanic Panic
 User Gallery


Registered: 07/31/09
Posts: 8,535
Loc: magic sugarcastle
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling] * 2
    #23762700 - 10/22/16 11:12 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:
So is it that you don't see the problems outlined in the OP as actual problems, or that you don't see them as problems worth addressing by governments? If you still think they are problems, but problems governments can't solve, then how should they be addressed?





I think you're missing what I am trying to say. It's difficult to elucidate, for me, anyway, so maybe I'm just not being clear or direct enough.

I don't think the government has any right to cap private sector investments. If people want to pour money into superficial investments, like studying balding patterns and how to make them go away, then that's fine and our right as a free economy to decide. However, I am saying that I think government needs to mandate/better manage funds in certain industries, like education, healthcare, and environmental protections. That could arise in the form of more taxes (like higher fund pools for educations - not just based on property taxes for school zoning districts) and/or better managed services (like a two-payer system for healthcare). Both of those options are pretty unpopular in a conservative capitalist forums. :shrug: I think it would take us, collectively as a society, agreeing that those industries are vital to establishing a thriving future and a basic human right.


--------------------
full blown human


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23765343 - 10/23/16 08:53 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

redgreenvines said:
from your OP
Quote:

blingbling said:
The real problem here is that we don't have a better way to allocate resources than supply and demand economics even though in many cases it is morally unjust. The only other kind of modern economy that has been trailed is central planning or communism which was a total disaster. So, what should we do to mitigate or erase these negative moral manifestations of supply and demand economics?



the operative verb is "to allocate".
the term "moral" is disruptive here.
the key enabler is the right to allocate, which is alluded to but not mentioned by name, but you indicate it was "trialed" but you spelled "trailed" so it did not seem that important in the OP --- COMMUNISM.

the view on this issue therefore is a view of ownership or the morality of the right to own resources: any morality of supply and demand is actually the morality of ownership itself!
distribution can be delegated to something like UBER or AMAZON (both are neither moral nor not moral - you need, you push a button, you pay electronically at the end of the month) - but the core moral issue is the right to own or entitlement, and that extends into the very idea of personal territory, or the right to defend your stuff, and that flattens out into your legal rights and freedoms under the charter/constitution of the country in which you own these things.

Of what specifically do you need an example? I think you are better off refining your question so that it makes sense in terms of what exists.




I think everything you've said is interesting and probably true, but it does't address the problem outlined in the OP. Just because these problems can be construed in legal terms does not mean you offer a solution. If you wish to address the moral dilemma's outlined in the OP within a legal framework then tell me, what laws should be added, changed or left to alone?

I said this to penelope tree and I will pose the same questions to you: So is it that you don't see the problems outlined in the OP as actual problems, or that you don't see them as problems worth addressing by governments? If you still think they are problems, but problems governments can't solve, then how should they be addressed?


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: Penelope_Tree]
    #23765384 - 10/23/16 09:11 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Penelope_Tree said:
Quote:

blingbling said:
So is it that you don't see the problems outlined in the OP as actual problems, or that you don't see them as problems worth addressing by governments? If you still think they are problems, but problems governments can't solve, then how should they be addressed?





I think you're missing what I am trying to say. It's difficult to elucidate, for me, anyway, so maybe I'm just not being clear or direct enough.

I don't think the government has any right to cap private sector investments. If people want to pour money into superficial investments, like studying balding patterns and how to make them go away, then that's fine and our right as a free economy to decide. However, I am saying that I think government needs to mandate/better manage funds in certain industries, like education, healthcare, and environmental protections. That could arise in the form of more taxes (like higher fund pools for educations - not just based on property taxes for school zoning districts) and/or better managed services (like a two-payer system for healthcare). Both of those options are pretty unpopular in a conservative capitalist forums. :shrug: I think it would take us, collectively as a society, agreeing that those industries are vital to establishing a thriving future and a basic human right.




With regards to the example of scientific research into male pattern baldness vs aid's research: what if any moral difference is their between regulation of say the education system and the scientific research system? If you think that regulation in the education system is acceptable, and I assume you believe it is acceptable because you agree that it promotes the greatest good for society, why is the research sector off limits for government regulation?

I think you might be trying to dodge the moral problems with supply and demand by reference to the limits of governments interventions in free markets. If government can intervene in the eduction system for the greater good then there is no reason that it could not intervene in similar ways in the research sector.

You say that the government doesn't have the right to cap private investment. Well, the government is the institution which dictates the rights of the individual in the first place. Some argue that governments do not have the right to enforce tax payer contribution to the public education system. But, thankfully enough people, like yourself, believe that it is in the best interest for society to do so. If enough people also believe that it is in the publics best interest to cap private investment into different sectors of the economy then doesn't it follow that it is the right of the government to enforce such laws?


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23765411 - 10/23/16 09:24 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Open your eyes Americans for you live in an open Oligarchy.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23765440 - 10/23/16 09:43 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

without repeating myself too much, no laws should be changed without analysis of the system, the root issue is the right to own.

how does the right to own and use what you own can cause a moral dilemma is what the  question has to address.

when there is clear data on that, time can be spent crafting laws and amendments to promote better moral integrity, i.e. fairness.

the basic idea is that while we live we are allowed to own what we legally acquire, how that may go wrong has to be examined and new questions asked.


Changing laws comes way after establishing a need to change laws.
If I were a legislator I would strike this issue from the agenda as soon as it came up for lack of substance.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23765481 - 10/23/16 09:59 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

You have the right to own a gun but not a bazooka, a grenade launcher or a nuclear warhead and there's a good reason for it.

Even something as basic as a proper background check would be nice for guns but in America the NRA lobbies way to hard against gun regulation so that they can sell more guns and keep up profiteering for the military industrial complex.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePenelope_Tree
Shamanic Panic
 User Gallery


Registered: 07/31/09
Posts: 8,535
Loc: magic sugarcastle
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23767706 - 10/24/16 06:03 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:
With regards to the example of scientific research into male pattern baldness vs aid's research: what if any moral difference is their between regulation of say the education system and the scientific research system? If you think that regulation in the education system is acceptable, and I assume you believe it is acceptable because you agree that it promotes the greatest good for society, why is the research sector off limits for government regulation?

I think you might be trying to dodge the moral problems with supply and demand by reference to the limits of governments interventions in free markets. If government can intervene in the eduction system for the greater good then there is no reason that it could not intervene in similar ways in the research sector.






I don't think you're grokking what I'm saying. "Scientific research" is extremely broad, first of all. It encompasses both public health issues, like AIDS research, Parkinsons research, etc and issues like baldness research, skin lightening research, etc. I am saying that public health issues should get social backing and therefore an allocation of public funds, like AIDS research, etc. Others, like baldness research, should not BUT that doesn't mean the government should limit the amount of funds invested in that. I say that in the same respect that I say that government shouldn't limit private school funding, but what it SHOULD do is allocate more funds/better manage the funds allocated towards public schools.

Research is too broad a subject to lump into one category, as it sounds like you're doing.


--------------------
full blown human


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrendanFlock
Stranger
Male

Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 1 day, 7 hours
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: Penelope_Tree]
    #23768136 - 10/24/16 08:22 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

It is to the tipping point that we discuss utility..because it is a necessary and derived function of economics..indeed if the worst were true..we would find someone who has a 0 as utility...which would mean he has no needs or wants...or demands met at all..and then we count to the highest ideal..which would be 100% utility..that is the final goal..of An American Dream..or even western philosophy..which is very efficient in election and determination and essence..and philosophy itself.. but the very root of this subtraction is indeed morality..it is common law to understand that people should get what they want and need...and this is a principle based on the founding Father of Economics.. Adam Smith! Serious is a typing catastrophy...from the will and the Brill..to the Bread itself..which is life..and life giving..which is the essence of our economy..which is to support life..in our many and varrying styles..

It is a good look long..looking long is good..to forcast something for the Olympics..is indeed a good and knowing longed..and longing forcast..that the stock market will go up is indeed a good write..and the rite..is of the sacrifice of time..which is what Freemasons want you to do..so the secret society..is indeed a noble but beneficial rite..into and in itself..which is on..and off..the nuances of an economy..are based on principles of thought..which is conjecture..and then to the tertiary industries..like wood and mining for example..which is replete with Orgasm..or orginization..the shelf is a Great wood Leap..to the foremost quantum benefit..of benefaction..of the nuance of the degree...itself..is a rainbow of high morality..and high tides..towards the common degree itself..which is a Great degree..in Spindling..or Soothsaying which is what the economists are trying to do..we have to break down the arguments..about the moral cost of goods..because they are goods that have use and function in our society..and the deliberate effects of which are in the Hind sight of things..which is where we can map and analyze patterns..on a normal earnings ratio..for the people involved..this is very specialized communication..in and out of the knot of the coming end times..which are an Apocalypse anyways..but there is always rebirth and renewal.. so the gross domestic product is a virtue in our sunnder and sunnyer Years..indeed is a ratio a chariot..of the mother of Authority..release is a better virtue..into the minority of the potent point itself..which is really a Slansky effect in and of itself..which shows trends..and alliances..with the welterweight..Good in the coming consumer..consumption is a good going device in time..that we have to manufacture an economy..which is good and all..but the common police say that morals have to come first..and that is why China is not pulling out their T-Bonds..or T-Bills..indeed it is the moral monopoly that rules the world..in games or in real life..we are always on the competitive astronomy and Astrology...in and of itself..is a Great deal to the logos..which is a host in and of itself..or otherwise the source of all things..we have to do things..that ring true! The sound of that rang true..and then we get this election which is about lies and deceit...but we can get the most over grossed profit..knowing that they are mostly and most likely telling the truth..AS FAR AS THEY KNOW IT!!


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: BrendanFlock]
    #23768250 - 10/24/16 08:54 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

some shit is just obvious I guess


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePenelope_Tree
Shamanic Panic
 User Gallery


Registered: 07/31/09
Posts: 8,535
Loc: magic sugarcastle
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23768473 - 10/24/16 10:06 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

redgreenvines said:
some shit is just obvious I guess





:lol:


--------------------
full blown human


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: Penelope_Tree]
    #23768991 - 10/25/16 04:49 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Penelope_Tree said:
Quote:

blingbling said:
With regards to the example of scientific research into male pattern baldness vs aid's research: what if any moral difference is their between regulation of say the education system and the scientific research system? If you think that regulation in the education system is acceptable, and I assume you believe it is acceptable because you agree that it promotes the greatest good for society, why is the research sector off limits for government regulation?

I think you might be trying to dodge the moral problems with supply and demand by reference to the limits of governments interventions in free markets. If government can intervene in the eduction system for the greater good then there is no reason that it could not intervene in similar ways in the research sector.






I don't think you're grokking what I'm saying. "Scientific research" is extremely broad, first of all. It encompasses both public health issues, like AIDS research, Parkinsons research, etc and issues like baldness research, skin lightening research, etc. I am saying that public health issues should get social backing and therefore an allocation of public funds, like AIDS research, etc. Others, like baldness research, should not BUT that doesn't mean the government should limit the amount of funds invested in that. I say that in the same respect that I say that government shouldn't limit private school funding, but what it SHOULD do is allocate more funds/better manage the funds allocated towards public schools.

Research is too broad a subject to lump into one category, as it sounds like you're doing.




I think I understand what your saying. Your basic claim is that what I have referred to as a moral dilemma is not in actual fact a moral dilemma. That's fine. But I think that if we really examine the implications of our societies allocation of resources you would find some ground for calling the example I provided a moral dilemma.

Let's conduct a little thought experiment.

let's imagine that I am standing in front of someone who is dying of AID's. And let's say that I have a miracle cure for AID's in my hand in the form of a liquid that one can drink. And let's say that I tip that liquid down the drain. Is my use of resources i.e.. the miracle cure, justified?

After all it was my private property, so there really isn't a moral dilemma, correct?

I would argue that this does constitute a moral dilemma. So, what is the difference between someone squandering their resources to the detriment of the sick in the above example and the example provided in the OP. Really it's just a matter of proximity. There is also the issue of the actual effectiveness of a cure for AID's which reality could not constitute a miracle cure. But essentially these are both immoral acts.


What do you think?


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23768992 - 10/25/16 04:51 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

redgreenvines I would also like to hear your opinion of the above thought experiment.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23769079 - 10/25/16 06:29 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

hi, this thought experiment or charade introduces the idea of waste which is a different moral dilemma. it also assumes private persons having personal arbitrary dispensation over a public resource with no recourse (the impunity to cruelly discard a systematically formulated cure in front of a diseased person who needs to ingest it).

the native american healing circle would help with this type of behavior.

OK OK let us assume it were not a public resource that the person somehow inherited a stash of AIDS medicine (not a real situation) then I doubt they would have it in their pocket, in their, kitchen, or in their house - it would need to be in the lab that they inherited, and the lab, for it to exist, would be governed by ethical inspections etc.
So
the owner of this lab would be supervised by regulations.
So when might they discard some medicine or all the medicine they had inherited in this lab? and would they have the right to destroy their asset by whim?
I think they do not have the right to destroy their inheritance if it is publicly regulated. the inheritance transfers the profit and the duty of the asset.

I hope that helps.
I don't really like thought experiments of this nature, but it might help to clarify that you can inherit or own things that are free of public obligation such as "Money" and you could also inherit things that are not free of obligation such as "the cure for aids in a corporation that has the lab in which the aids cure is prepared and stored".

aside from that, the dilemma of holding back the  crowds clamoring around  christ who could cure anything just by being the son of god is a thing of dreams.
people are not that magic, but were they so magically enabled that they could heal all ills then probably they would radiate health like a star.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePenelope_Tree
Shamanic Panic
 User Gallery


Registered: 07/31/09
Posts: 8,535
Loc: magic sugarcastle
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23771603 - 10/25/16 09:54 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:
Your basic claim is that what I have referred to as a moral dilemma is not in actual fact a moral dilemma. That's fine. But I think that if we really examine the implications of our societies allocation of resources you would find some ground for calling the example I provided a moral dilemma.

Let's conduct a little thought experiment.

let's imagine that I am standing in front of someone who is dying of AID's. And let's say that I have a miracle cure for AID's in my hand in the form of a liquid that one can drink. And let's say that I tip that liquid down the drain. Is my use of resources i.e.. the miracle cure, justified?

After all it was my private property, so there really isn't a moral dilemma, correct?

I would argue that this does constitute a moral dilemma. So, what is the difference between someone squandering their resources to the detriment of the sick in the above example and the example provided in the OP. Really it's just a matter of proximity. There is also the issue of the actual effectiveness of a cure for AID's which reality could not constitute a miracle cure. But essentially these are both immoral acts.


What do you think?




Wow, you really don't understand what I'm saying but you think you do, and just keep pounding your point.


--------------------
full blown human


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23771786 - 10/25/16 10:50 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

redgreenvines said:
this thought experiment or charade introduces the idea of waste which is a different moral dilemma.





My argument is that resources spent on research for male pattern baldness is basically wasted resources considering the other applications that these resources could be used for, and that the system of supply and demand allows these resources to be squandered.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: Penelope_Tree]
    #23771810 - 10/25/16 10:58 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Penelope_Tree said:
Quote:

blingbling said:
Your basic claim is that what I have referred to as a moral dilemma is not in actual fact a moral dilemma. That's fine. But I think that if we really examine the implications of our societies allocation of resources you would find some ground for calling the example I provided a moral dilemma.

Let's conduct a little thought experiment.

let's imagine that I am standing in front of someone who is dying of AID's. And let's say that I have a miracle cure for AID's in my hand in the form of a liquid that one can drink. And let's say that I tip that liquid down the drain. Is my use of resources i.e.. the miracle cure, justified?

After all it was my private property, so there really isn't a moral dilemma, correct?

I would argue that this does constitute a moral dilemma. So, what is the difference between someone squandering their resources to the detriment of the sick in the above example and the example provided in the OP. Really it's just a matter of proximity. There is also the issue of the actual effectiveness of a cure for AID's which reality could not constitute a miracle cure. But essentially these are both immoral acts.


What do you think?




Wow, you really don't understand what I'm saying but you think you do, and just keep pounding your point.




Basically you don't want the economic system to change. That's what you outlined in your previous post:

I am saying that public health issues should get social backing and therefore an allocation of public funds, like AIDS research, etc. Others, like baldness research, should not BUT that doesn't mean the government should limit the amount of funds invested in that. I say that in the same respect that I say that government shouldn't limit private school funding, but what it SHOULD do is allocate more funds/better manage the funds allocated towards public schools.

As far as I am aware governments already do these things, so you are not in fact asking for any change of the economic system.

So, you either don't believe the moral dilemma I have sited is a meal dilemma, you don't understand what constitutes a moral dilemma (which I don't think is true) or you are don't care if people needlessly suffer (I also don't think this is true).


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleballsalsaMDiscord
Universally Loathed and Reviled
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 20,876
Loc: Foreign Lands
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23771978 - 10/26/16 12:11 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:
Quote:

redgreenvines said:
this thought experiment or charade introduces the idea of waste which is a different moral dilemma.





My argument is that resources spent on research for male pattern baldness is basically wasted resources considering the other applications that these resources could be used for, and that the system of supply and demand allows these resources to be squandered.





The counter-argument here is that without supply-demand interaction, the resources are more likely to remain unexploited.  Example: For much of human history gold has been considered desirable despite having little intrinsic value beyond ornamentation.  In the modern day however, gold has many important uses, especially in electronics.  If not for the frivolous effort of countless civilizations in mining, refining, and hoarding, gold for thousands of years, we might have had to start from zero on the world gold stockpile in the 20th century (19th actually i guess)


--------------------


Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: Supply, Demand & Morality [Re: blingbling]
    #23772387 - 10/26/16 05:49 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:
Quote:

redgreenvines said:
this thought experiment or charade introduces the idea of waste which is a different moral dilemma.





My argument is that resources spent on research for male pattern baldness is basically wasted resources considering the other applications that these resources could be used for, and that the system of supply and demand allows these resources to be squandered.



of what other system are you thinking


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5  [ show all ]

Shop: PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Determinism & Objective/Subjective Morality TinTree 2,765 13 01/24/05 10:34 AM
by shroomydan
* Are morals subjective?
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 5,852 35 04/24/03 05:58 AM
by MarkostheGnostic
* Do Basic Human Morals Exist
( 1 2 all )
mrfreedom 5,078 24 05/28/02 07:55 AM
by Sclorch
* Morality Lizard_King 937 13 01/01/05 10:32 PM
by LunarEclipse
* Question for moral objectivists
( 1 2 all )
silversoul7 3,845 31 06/14/03 10:42 AM
by NewToTrippin
* Matrix Reloaded True Meaning/ Transcript of Neo/Architect
( 1 2 3 all )
HagbardCeline 7,009 45 04/17/12 12:47 AM
by Buster_Brown
* A decision, morality. nakors_junk_bag 611 15 12/14/05 03:14 PM
by leery11
* There is a limited amount of energy.. get yours while supplies last
( 1 2 all )
Mixomatosis 2,094 23 01/12/05 01:43 AM
by Zekebomb

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
1,282 topic views. 1 members, 12 guests and 7 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.06 seconds spending 0.011 seconds on 14 queries.