Home | Community | Message Board

Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
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: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflineRhizoid
carbon unit
Male

Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 14 hours, 19 minutes
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Swami]
    #2900777 - 07/17/04 08:13 PM (19 years, 6 months ago)

Swami's observation is of course correct.

Morality is always subjective, it always has a purpose. Morality without purpose would be sort of meaningless wouldn't it?

For most people this purpose boils down to self-propagation and the propagation of their DNA. But sometimes people find other and more self-transcending things that they designate as their purpose. That's what makes us Homo Sapiens being an interesting species after all. Without the self-transcendent stuff we would just be boring monkeys, with very little potential power to create new things to value.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Rhizoid]
    #2900804 - 07/17/04 08:29 PM (19 years, 6 months ago)

But sometimes people find other and more self-transcending things that they designate as their purpose.

Maybe these transcenders are more forward-looking and not necessarily less self-serving. Someone trying to save the rain forests may see be very interested in preserving the human race (and his DNA) beyond the next five generations and sees the possible repercussions if nothing is done.

My niece just went to the Philippines as a Christian missionary. She is not really interested in the people there, but in converting some to her ideology. It is an attempt to earn favor with her parents and Church (approval) and to make others more in her image and likeness (subtle violence and coercion).


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,685
Loc: On the Border
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Swami]
    #2901014 - 07/17/04 09:46 PM (19 years, 6 months ago)

"She is not really interested in the people there, but in converting some to her ideology"

She might be a nice girl, but that sort of activity is cultural genocide.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRhizoid
carbon unit
Male

Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 14 hours, 19 minutes
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Swami]
    #2901036 - 07/17/04 09:51 PM (19 years, 6 months ago)

Yeah, when it comes to DNA propagation there is really no sharp boundary, in terms of basic motivation, between fucking for procreation and hugging trees for Mother Gaia.

On the other note, it's very disturbing that so many self-transcendence ideologies tend to hurt people. But for exactly that reason I think they (the problematic ideologies) will either fade away or transform into less hurtful ideologies.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,685
Loc: On the Border
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Swami]
    #2901044 - 07/17/04 09:54 PM (19 years, 6 months ago)

The depletion of the rain forests in the Amazon in the 80s and 90s (some today) was the direct result of the influence of christian missionaries.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #2901139 - 07/17/04 10:28 PM (19 years, 6 months ago)

And the world's hunger for cheap beef (read: McDonald's). The funny part is: the stripped land is very poor for grazing.


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,685
Loc: On the Border
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Swami]
    #2901166 - 07/17/04 10:37 PM (19 years, 6 months ago)

Most of the soil composition in the rainforest is sand. The competition between plants is that intense that the soil has mostly been leeched to sand. Poor farming land too...but a great place to drill oil...after you run off the people who stripped it for agricultural purposes. Then the missionaries move on to christianize another tribe...


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekaiowas
lest we baguette
 User Gallery

Registered: 07/14/03
Posts: 5,501
Loc: oz
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Rhizoid]
    #2901208 - 07/17/04 10:55 PM (19 years, 6 months ago)

awesome thread!

"For most people this purpose boils down to self-propagation and the propagation of their DNA. But sometimes people find other and more self-transcending things that they designate as their purpose. That's what makes us Homo Sapiens being an interesting species after all. Without the self-transcendent stuff we would just be boring monkeys, with very little potential power to create new things to value. "

:thumbup:  btw, good to see you here rhizoid :smile:


--------------------
Annnnnnd I had a light saber and my friend was there and I said "you look like an indian" and he said "you look like satan" and he found a stick and a rock and he named the rock ooga booga and he named the stick Stick and we both thought that was pretty funny. We got eaten alive by mosquitos but didn't notice til the next day. I stepped on some glass while wading in the swamp and cut my foot open, didn't bother me til the next day either....yeah it was a good time, ended the night by buying some liquor for minors and drinking nips and going to he diner and eating chicken fingers, and then I went home and went to bed.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDrubuShrume
EAT ME - I'm afungi

Registered: 05/14/02
Posts: 449
Loc: Right where I need to be
Last seen: 16 years, 4 months
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Swami]
    #2901352 - 07/18/04 12:03 AM (19 years, 6 months ago)

I live my life treating people as an "end-in-themself" as opposed to a "means-to-an-end" a-la Immanuel Kant.... treat people as a goal as opposed to a way to get to a goal...


--------------------
AH HA....


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBlueCoyote
Beyond
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 15 days
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: DrubuShrume]
    #2901659 - 07/18/04 03:24 AM (19 years, 6 months ago)

:thumbup:

<- doesn't like to be used as a mean. I am my own mean to what purpose I select by myself :smile: This mean must totally fulfill that purpose. And morality of others I only accept, if they comply with my utter inner morality. So you have constantly check yourself and also claim the others morality as immoral if adequate. As I said, morality has proven to cover the most evil deeds in history. One should avoid to step into this trap.


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinedeafpanda
Stranger
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 984
Loc: Inguland
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: BlueCoyote]
    #2901760 - 07/18/04 05:17 AM (19 years, 6 months ago)

I would say that morality is subjective. If it was objective, then we are not good at applying it, since everyone has different ideas.

Either way, because of this, I think that morality should stay the fuck away from lawmaking. Laws should be strictly utilitarian in nature - they should make the world a happier place. Banning gay mariage, contraception, abortions on "moral" grounds is pretty sick.

However, I think that there are objective *relative* moral truths. For example, I believe that "killing one baby for no reason is better than killing two babies for no reason" is a true moral statement, independent of the subject. In real life, though, propositions are rarely this clear-cut.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePed
Interested In Your Brain
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Swami]
    #2908131 - 07/20/04 10:55 AM (19 years, 6 months ago)

>> ALL voluntary relationships are formed with self-interest in mind

Why? Why do you keep insisting that all human beings are inherently selfish, as though self-centredness were our first nature? If self-interest were our first nature, we would be unable to change that trait in ourselves. Because we are able to train ourselves to become less self-centred -- eventually completely other-centred -- it must be true that self-centredness is not an inherent aspect of our being. If self-interest were our first nature, we would be perfectly harmonious with this part of ourselves. Because the world is filled with suffering and conflict which has it's root in self-centredness, it must be true that self-centeredness is something layered overtop of what we actually are.

Simply because the self-first attitude is so deeply ingrained that it is almost instinctual does not necessarily indicate that the trait is either unchangeable nor natural. Simply because the habit of self-cherishing permeates much of our motivation now does not mean we are supposed to be this way, or that we forever bound to continue this way.


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


:poison: Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud :poison:
Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Ped]
    #2908172 - 07/20/04 11:10 AM (19 years, 6 months ago)

Why? Why do you keep insisting that all human beings are inherently selfish...

Um, because it is true.

Let's take a poll and you can start:

Who here dates another that they cannot stand to be around?

Who here has a best friend from whom they get nothing in return from?

If a terrorist held you, a friend and a politically unimportant stranger as hostages and asked you to pick your friend or the stranger to be killed next, who would you (and everyone else) pick?


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePed
Interested In Your Brain
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Ped]
    #2908192 - 07/20/04 11:15 AM (19 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Ped said:

If self-interest were our first nature, we would be unable to change that trait in ourselves. Because we are able to train ourselves to become less self-centred -- eventually completely other-centred -- it must be true that self-centredness is not an inherent aspect of our being. If self-interest were our first nature, we would be perfectly harmonious with this part of ourselves. Because the world is filled with suffering and conflict which has it's root in self-centredness, it must be true that self-centeredness is something layered overtop of what we actually are.

Simply because the self-first attitude is so deeply ingrained that it is almost instinctual does not necessarily indicate that the trait is either unchangeable nor natural. Simply because the habit of self-cherishing permeates much of our motivation now does not mean we are supposed to be this way, or that we forever bound to continue this way.




Ped's debate rule #5: Always address points raised in your opponent's post with suggestions other than those already argued.


>> If a terrorist held you, a friend and a politically unimportant stranger as hostages and asked you to pick your friend or the stranger to be killed next, who would you (and everyone else) pick?

What if I told you that I would pick myself? I cannot claim that I would in such a situation, but if it came over the newswire that someone in such a situation chose himself to die over his comrades, even strangers, what would this mean to you? If selfishness were inherent in our nature, we would not be able to refuse the selfish instinct. If it's true that no human being has the capacity to choose the welfare of others before himself, what does this tell us about free will?


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


:poison: Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud :poison:
Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace


Edited by Ped (07/20/04 11:26 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDoctorJ
Male

Registered: 06/30/03
Posts: 8,846
Loc: space
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Rhizoid]
    #2908228 - 07/20/04 11:25 AM (19 years, 6 months ago)

yay!!!

Rhizoid is back!!!


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Ped]
    #2908256 - 07/20/04 11:33 AM (19 years, 6 months ago)

If you refused to pick as the terrorist instructed you, all three of you would be killed instantly.

Nice side-step on the one and hyper-jump over the other two questions which get right to the HEART of the matter. It is impossible to continue this discussion without blanket honesty. Of course, if you are afraid of what you might discover then keep playing the avoidance game.


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePed
Interested In Your Brain
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Swami]
    #2908407 - 07/20/04 12:23 PM (19 years, 6 months ago)

Here again are the points I raised for you, Swami:

1. If primary selfishness is inherent in our nature, we would not have the ability to change. We have the ability to change the selfish habit. Therfore primary self-interest is not an inherent aspect of our nature.

2. If primary selfishness is inherent in our nature, we would be perfectly harmonious with this part of ourselves. Because humanity throughout history has been unable to reconcile self-interest and happiness, our self-interest is a source of disharmony and is therefore not inherent in our being.

3. If primary selfishness is inherent in our nature, then it must follow that a human being would not have the capacity to put others before himself, especially in highly charged situations. If the welfare of others is organized relative to the self, and this arrangement is to be permanently affixed in human behaviour, then no human being would have the ability to override those selfishly motivated instincts. Since human beings possess free will, they have the ability to override those instincts. Therefore primary self-interest is not an inherent aspect of our being, and is instead a learned behaviour, like the skill of walking.

What you have been suggesting here, Swami, is that primary self-interest is an inherent aspect of our being simply because we do it all the time. I speak English all the time, and have been doing so since I can remember. All of my thoughts are in English. Everything I express verbally is done so in English. It has always been this way for me. Does this mean that I was born English, that the English language is inherent in my being? Of course it does not. Can I learn another language? Yes. Can I refrain from speaking English and instead speak only the new language? Yes. It might also be helpful to point out that some people who learn languages other than their native tongue end up forgetting their first language entirely.

Can I learn unselfish behaviour? Yes. Can I unlearn selfish behaviour? Yes. If selfish behaviour were inherent in my humanity and not a transistory part of my person, how is it that I can accomplish these things?

>> Who here dates another that they cannot stand to be around?

Nobody would choose to be around someone who bothers them. This does not identify human beings as innately selfish, because our being bothered by others is optional.

The bother occurs within the person who is bothered. It does not emanate like radiation from the person who appears bothersome. Because this is true, the person who appears bothersome cannot be inherently annoying. Acknowledging this, the person who is bothered can apply effort in seeing good qualities in the seemingly bothersome person, eventually overcoming the idea that they are inherently bothersome and recognizing them as valuable human beings who are to be cherished. Since the annoyance occured within the mind of the person who was annoyed, it is within the annoyed person's freedom to choose an alternative feeling toward the other person. Because we do not often do this indicates that we are habitually selfish. It does not indicate that we innately selfish. The fact that we have the ability to make this choice means that we are not innately selfish.


>> Who here has a best friend from whom they get nothing in return from?

One can befriend another without the expectation to receive topical benefits. Since the expectation to receive benefits from the other person originates and is sustained entirely within the mind of the person feeling that expectation, it is within that person's ability to recognize the illnecessity of that expecation and instead choose to explore the good qualities in the other person, seeking reasons to cherish them simply for being a human being with the same wishes for happiness as they. Because we do not often do this indicates that we are habitually selfish. It does not indicate that we are innately selfish. The fact that we have the ability to make this choice means that we are not innately selfish.

If anything, these two examples indicate that laziness is another bad habit found in human beings. The reason we don't make the choice to oppose our feelings of expectation (attachment) and annoyance (anger), or any of our other afflictive habits, has to do with it being so much easier simply to hate or become angry, or to distance ourself from other people. Since we equate ease with happiness, we are naturally drawn to the path of least resistence. Neither hatred nor anger make us happy, however. In fact, they take away our happiness and replace it with suffering.


>> If a terrorist held you, a friend and a politically unimportant stranger as hostages and asked you to pick your friend or the stranger to be killed next, who would you (and everyone else) pick?

>> If you refused to pick as the terrorist instructed you, all three of you would be killed instantly.

What you are attempting to do with this is corner me into admitting that it is not possbile for me to be unselfish in this impossible situation. The dynamics of this situation, though, are irrelevant. It does not matter whether I choose the stranger or the long-time companion. Much more important is the motivation behind who I chose, because the motivation is what's part of purely internal circumstance. If I happened to choose the stranger, it does not necessarily indicate that I did so because I feel less akin to him than I did to the person who is my long-time comrade. If prior to this incident I had taken the time and effort to cultivate a mind of equanimity -- that is, the mind that views all living beings as equally worth of happiness and peace -- I might take other factors into consideration. Of these two unfortunate people, whose death would mean the most suffering for others? If my friend's family had all since passed away, and he had no wife or children, it might make sense in this impossible situation to select him to die over the stranger who, in fear, expressed that he wished to be home with his children.

The point here is that it's my choice to approach this situation selfishly or unselfishly. Because most people on the earth would choose the selfish avenue indicates that we are habitually selfish. It does not indicate that we are innately selfish. The fact that we have the ability to approach this situation unselfishly indicates that we are not innately selfish beings, and indeed have the capacity to become unselfish. All we must do is understand why it is so important. It is a hopeful bit of reality.

I agree with you, Swami, when you remind us that primary self-interest is indeed absolutely pervasive in us as individuals and as a society. I also agree that recognizing this fact and accepting it is much more helpful than fleeing from it. I completely disagree, however, when you suggest that selfishness is a permanent fixture in human beings, that it is somehow natural to follow our selfish tendencies into the innumerable and often unbearable troubles they bring us.


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


:poison: Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud :poison:
Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace


Edited by Ped (07/20/04 12:40 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Ped]
    #2908556 - 07/20/04 01:02 PM (19 years, 6 months ago)

Nobody would choose to be around someone who bothers them
Ah, progress. So we choose to be around others who please us (self-interest).

Oops, no answer on the best friend question. Will try again, do you get ANYHTING in return from your best friend; yes or no? (Note: we can get to the deeper discussion once we get past the basic questions).

that it is somehow natural to follow our selfish tendencies...
ALL creatures follow their selfish tendencies; even those that form symbiotic realtionships only do so to gain more than they could alone. This is as "natural" as one can get. Name one creature besides your alleged super-human that does not.


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekaiowas
lest we baguette
 User Gallery

Registered: 07/14/03
Posts: 5,501
Loc: oz
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: Swami]
    #2908602 - 07/20/04 01:20 PM (19 years, 6 months ago)

I would say it's a cross between swami and ped's ideas. cause it's like, you need that self interest part of you especially in your younger years for survival. this isn't taught to us, or at least it isn't a conscious decision made by a baby to cry when it needs to be changed, or fed, or whatever.

At the same point, not all of our actions are going to be selfish either. being selfish requires that you are concerned of yourself, regardless of others. I have put others before myself plenty of times expecting nothing in return.

This can clearly be displayed with weed smoking. I don't know about you swami, but there are plenty of potheads my age around here that will smoke you out for no other reason but to smoke with someone who wants weed. It's like a "I've been there before and it really sucks" kinda thing.

saying selfishness can't be changed is like saying compassion for humans doesn't exist. why? cause the root of compassion is putting others in front of oneself.


--------------------
Annnnnnd I had a light saber and my friend was there and I said "you look like an indian" and he said "you look like satan" and he found a stick and a rock and he named the rock ooga booga and he named the stick Stick and we both thought that was pretty funny. We got eaten alive by mosquitos but didn't notice til the next day. I stepped on some glass while wading in the swamp and cut my foot open, didn't bother me til the next day either....yeah it was a good time, ended the night by buying some liquor for minors and drinking nips and going to he diner and eating chicken fingers, and then I went home and went to bed.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: The Nonsense of Morality [Re: kaiowas]
    #2908693 - 07/20/04 01:46 PM (19 years, 6 months ago)

Mother Teresa: "The more you have, the more you are occupied, the less you give. But the less you have the more free you are. Poverty for us is a freedom. It is not mortification, a penance. It is joyful freedom. There is no television here, no this, no that. But we are perfectly happy."

She gives of herself BECAUSE IT MAKES HER HAPPY. She did it for the personal satisfaction and reward. This is self-interest!


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* are there morals?
( 1 2 all )
CleverName 4,185 33 09/21/02 11:26 AM
by Albino_Jesus
* Any unselfish reason to have children?
( 1 2 all )
Lennyk 4,116 30 04/09/11 08:18 AM
by Lennyk
* Are morals subjective?
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 5,852 35 04/24/03 05:58 AM
by MarkostheGnostic
* Is anything we do unselfish?
( 1 2 all )
RebelSteve33 1,733 25 12/18/02 07:21 PM
by Anonymous
* Do Basic Human Morals Exist
( 1 2 all )
mrfreedom 5,078 24 05/28/02 07:55 AM
by Sclorch
* Morals & religion (christian accountabilty cont.) joeshitragpicker 869 5 01/30/04 10:40 AM
by jpod
* Does Morality hinder Evolution?
( 1 2 all )
deff 4,338 33 08/13/04 01:43 PM
by Swami
* Question for moral objectivists
( 1 2 all )
silversoul7 3,845 31 06/14/03 10:42 AM
by NewToTrippin

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
3,908 topic views. 1 members, 13 guests and 10 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 0.034 seconds spending 0.013 seconds on 15 queries.