|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Spock is WRONG Regarding "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one..." [Re: Loaded Shaman]
#26647910 - 05/04/20 09:50 AM (3 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Loaded Shaman said: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."
Spock is confusing ethical consistency with mathematical logic.
Ethics are not mathematics, and the logic which governs the premises and conclusions of the two isn’t necessarily interchangeable.
Philosophical logic, or what is better termed “rational consistency”, or “reason”, does not assert mathematical logic as axiomatic.
This is because mathematics is wholly abstract, where philosophy is meta, incorporating both the abstract and the concrete.
Philosophy, of which ethics is a major category, concerns the nature of existence, itself, not merely the abstract measurement and categorization of it.
Discuss.
Assumes the needs are in conflict. Assumes needs, and presumably preferences exist. (Is this true of ants or cells?) Assumes there are selves. Assumes needs aren't constantly changing. Assumes all situations are comparable. Assumes all situations never intersect. Doesn't define terms. etc.
Just more bullshit generalizations, for folks who don't realize that's all they are, to argue about.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,532
|
Re: Spock is WRONG Regarding "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one..." [Re: laughingdog]
#26647955 - 05/04/20 10:07 AM (3 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
logic is not really mathematics, in most cases it is simply a conventional approach to sequential causality or inclusion of like things within sets, otherwise it is logical posturing, or pretense.
Spock was great at all of that.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Spock is WRONG Regarding "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one..." [Re: Loaded Shaman]
#26657602 - 05/08/20 02:29 PM (3 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Loaded Shaman said: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."
Spock is confusing ethical consistency with mathematical logic.
Ethics are not mathematics, and the logic which governs the premises and conclusions of the two isn’t necessarily interchangeable.
Philosophical logic, or what is better termed “rational consistency”, or “reason”, does not assert mathematical logic as axiomatic.
This is because mathematics is wholly abstract, where philosophy is meta, incorporating both the abstract and the concrete.
Philosophy, of which ethics is a major category, concerns the nature of existence, itself, not merely the abstract measurement and categorization of it.
Discuss.
Perhaps this is over analyzing what is simply regurgitated Karl Marx, by the screen writer(s), which, statement or philosophy, has never resulted, in an effective government; but on the contrary has generally produced absolute horrors.
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,459
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 43 minutes, 32 seconds
|
Re: Spock is WRONG Regarding "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one..." [Re: redgreenvines]
#26658324 - 05/08/20 07:50 PM (3 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Mathmatics is indeed a formal philosophy. Spock was my hero, too. Read Spocks World if you havent
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
nooneman


Registered: 04/24/09
Posts: 14,557
Loc: Utah
|
Re: Spock is WRONG Regarding "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one..." [Re: Loaded Shaman]
#26658686 - 05/08/20 10:28 PM (3 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
That was just like, a cool line in a movie explaining that he was choosing to sacrifice himself for the greater good and stuff. Not like, a broad philosophical declaration or something. Even so, sacrificing yourself to save a bunch of people is genuinely heroic. And there is something to be said for not sacrificing everyone in exchange for a single person. If you had the choice between saving 1000 people and killing 1 person, or saving 1 person but killing 1000, clearly most people are going to choose to save 1000 all other things being equal. So there is some logic and reasoning in what he's saying.
But at the end of the day, it was just a cool line in a movie in a relatively contrived and forced setup. I mean, the movie was good, but that whole "someone must sacrifice themselves" setup was totally forced at the very end for no good reason other than to have a dramatic ending.
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Spock is WRONG Regarding "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one..." [Re: nooneman]
#26658725 - 05/08/20 10:48 PM (3 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah psychologists have a test based on contrived choices, for this sort of thing:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=psychology+test%2C+train+saving+people%2C+killing+person&t=hd&ia=web
https://healthland.time.com/2011/12/05/would-you-kill-one-person-to-save-five-new-research-on-a-classic-debate/
"This dilemma is a famous philosophical conundrum that was originally called the “trolley problem.” Now a team from Michigan State University’s psychology department has used virtual-reality technology to test how we respond psychologically and physiologically when faced with this problem." ... etc. ....
|
|