|
 Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
 Re: Right and Wrong  [Re: MrKurtz]
#409729 - 09/30/01 11:17 PM (23 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
> So, do you think people would be better off if there was no right or wrong or are you just playing devils advocate?
I think life is more enjoyable due to a moral code, but I'd rather live my life without moral restraint and fear of legal reprecussions of such a lifestyle. I'm not playing devils advocate. I'm saying that I don't see any such thing as "universal" right or wrong. Also, like I illustrated, many actions are considered "right" in one context and "wrong" in another.
> Murder in war is pretty much self defense, and war itself is usually thought of as wrong.
I'm sure that many Americans would disagree with you on that point, given the current political climate.
> If you use a necessary amount of force on a criminal, you use just enough to keep yourself safe and make sure the criminal doesn't escape and cause more harm.
People who possess marijuana are criminals. Prostitutes and their "John's" are criminals. Does it then follow that it's "right" to use force against them?
Force doesn't mean being beaten up. Force can simply mean being handcuffed.
> You can argue just about anything as not being universal or provable, theres no way i can prove you aren't just an apparition of my imagination.
Yep, and there's no way around fundamental problems like that. Descartes thought he had away around his "Evil Demon", but it was simply faith based.
> But its not very likely that you are, so i would believe that you are a "real" person, and this world is "real".
Why isn't it very likely?
|
Anonymous
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: MrKurtz]
#409732 - 09/30/01 11:24 PM (23 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
>>what if the free will of 2 beings conflict?
That is where the law of karma comes into effect.
|
MokshaMan
enthusiast
Registered: 03/12/01
Posts: 280
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: Kid]
#409808 - 10/01/01 01:27 AM (23 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I'm fairly certain I've argued similiar things with you before Kid. I don't get how if there's no reality in your nihilist view that this is anything to concern yourself with, but since you're here, I'll try to explain more as to why I believe these things. I believe that most morals come about from the norms of society; however, I think that there is such a thing as universal right and wrong. I partially used the idea of absolute truth and falsehood because it's as close to universal right and wrong in non-abstract forms that I could think of. My main use of the mathematics was to show that not everything falls into the category of right and wrong(although classified as such by society), just as not everything falls into the category of true and false. I was not argueing that true and false had anything to do with the morals of right and wrong. I personally hold the firm belief that people have the absolute right to exist and not be forcefully subjected to another's will or forcefully subject another to your will. I am aware that by joining society, instead of heading off into the woods(mountains, whatever) to live in solitude, I have yeilded to an authority to carry out force based on the norms of society. There is nothing, that anyone can say or do to convince me that there is not some form of universal right and wrong, just as I'm sure there's no way I could convince you of the opposite. Just because an idea is abstract, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Not to use this as a point of argueing morals, mathematics is abstract but I doubt mainy would argue it doesn't exist. Of course if you don't think you exist, I doubt the thought of ideas existing would fit your system.
>> Although I tend to think many of the basic beliefs in the English system of common law are based on the belief of right and wrong develop by society to insure a maximium amount of freedom.
> You mean egocentric freedom in a well-developed hierarchical capitalist class system?
No, as I understand it common law was developed as England came out of the medieval period when capitalism didn't exist in the vast form it's taken today. I believe it was William Law who was the first to write these down. Of course some of these ideas were taken furth by the enlightenment and adapted further into the system that exists today.
Edited by MokshaMan on 10/01/01 02:34 AM.
--------------------
Men can only be happy when they do not assume that the object of life is happiness.
-- George Owell
|
MokshaMan
enthusiast
Registered: 03/12/01
Posts: 280
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: Kid]
#409812 - 10/01/01 01:31 AM (23 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
>Force doesn't mean being beaten up. Force can simply mean being handcuffed.
I agree with you 100% on this point.
--------------------
Men can only be happy when they do not assume that the object of life is happiness.
-- George Owell
|
 missulena
enthusiast
Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 251
Last seen: 22 years, 10 months
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: MokshaMan]
#409833 - 10/01/01 02:41 AM (23 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
More to the point theres well adjusted people and people who havent adapted so well. Well adjusted people respect the rights of other people and wish no harm on anyone, on the other hand people who have been traumatised in there early years sometimes reach a point where they dont give a shit about anyone and put themselves first because they believe no ones ever been kind to them theve only really got themseleves to care for them.
Im not talking about anyone here because i dont know them well enough but I think antisocial attitudes develop from neglect or percieved neglect.
Is there right and wrong ? I think the universe just is and has no ego or intentions i think this will be proven in the not to distant future but the rest of the universe is really irrelevant to our daily life what is relevant is that everyone of us lives in and is supported by a society with other people who have agreed that there is a right and a wrong.
Society as a whole may be destructive but its far more powerful than the individual or minority groups who believe in anarchy, so obey or be caged.
Edited by missulena on 10/01/01 03:54 AM.
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: ]
#410025 - 10/01/01 10:54 AM (23 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
>>what if the free will of 2 beings conflict?
>That is where the law of karma comes into effect.
Funny. Free will = self efficacy and karma = fatalism, two modes of being which are incompatible.
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: MokshaMan]
#410030 - 10/01/01 11:02 AM (23 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
> I'm fairly certain I've argued similiar things with you before Kid. I don't get how if there's no reality in your nihilist view that this is anything to concern yourself with, but since you're here, I'll try to explain more as to why I believe these things.
Well, it's part of the wonderful thing of nihilism is that it denies its own existence (for how can you believe in the existence of nihilism?)
I concern myself with things because I experience. And with experience comes pleasure or pain. Science and reasoning **seem** to be the best ways for me to plan my life, but that doesn't mean there's any substance to it. It's a duality of being and nothingness. Or, even a hypocrisy, if you will.
> There is nothing, that anyone can say or do to convince me that there is not some form of universal right and wrong, just as I'm sure there's no way I could convince you of the opposite.
I'm glad you use the term "I believe" in your post and have a statement like this. These are your beliefs. I don't think I really want to change anyone's beliefs. I just want to show people a different way of looking at things, just as I enjoy reading other people's views.
> Not to use this as a point of argueing morals, mathematics is abstract but I doubt mainy would argue it doesn't exist.
I don't really want to get into the whole "what exists" debate. I see what you're getting at. Mathematics is just a system. A system with practical applications in the world. Morality is a system also, with practical applications. Both mathematics and morality exist. (is that what you're trying to say?)
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: missulena]
#410031 - 10/01/01 11:05 AM (23 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
> More to the point theres well adjusted people and people who havent adapted so well. Well adjusted people respect the rights of other people and wish no harm on anyone, on the other hand people who have been traumatised in there early years sometimes reach a point where they dont give a shit about anyone and put themselves first because they believe no ones ever been kind to them theve only really got themseleves to care for them.
But again though, you're using "well adjusted" within the context of our civilization. In pre-historic times, "well adjusted" may have well meant being able to use weapons and kill ruthlessly in a split second.
|
MokshaMan
enthusiast
Registered: 03/12/01
Posts: 280
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: Kid]
#410281 - 10/01/01 04:22 PM (23 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
That's exactly what I was saying. Is that systems do exist that can not be seen.
--------------------
Men can only be happy when they do not assume that the object of life is happiness.
-- George Owell
|
MrKurtz
enthusiast
Registered: 08/04/01
Posts: 303
Last seen: 22 years, 10 months
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: Kid]
#410445 - 10/01/01 07:15 PM (23 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
"I think life is more enjoyable due to a moral code, but I'd rather live my life without moral restraint and fear of legal reprecussions of such a lifestyle. I'm not playing devils advocate. I'm saying that I don't see any such thing as "universal" right or wrong. Also, like I illustrated, many actions are considered "right" in one context and "wrong" in another. "
Well, the thing that sucks is, you live with our moral code with legal reprecussions, and don't have a choice about it. But, if you had a choice between our current society and a society without a moral code or legal reprecussions (anarchy), which would you take?
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: MrKurtz]
#410748 - 10/01/01 11:40 PM (23 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
> But, if you had a choice between our current society and a society without a moral code or legal reprecussions (anarchy), which would you take?
I'd choose to live in this one, for safety's sake. If I ever felt suicidal, I'd life in the anarchic society. If I was living in this society and wanted to violate the moral code, I would weigh the consequences of my actions with the likelihood of getting caugh, and perhaps, take my chances.
Basically (and of course, hypothetically), I'd be a moral cheater, but would be very careful about what cards I have up my sleeves.
|
oneoverzero
veteran
Registered: 01/23/00
Posts: 758
Loc: Cyber Space
Last seen: 23 years, 1 month
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: CherryBom]
#411089 - 10/02/01 09:18 AM (23 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Gotta tell ya, when I was little boy, loved plastic models... Then I found this one of a CherryBomb little custom chopper motorcycle, had to have it 'cause the gas tank on the bike was a red plastic sphere - only thing tho... there was a bike trailer for it, and, a kick-ass truck to pull it. So I glued together the bike and played with that. I guess that was right for a 10 year old. I got to decide what was right. But I kinda thought it was wrong for the rest of the model to go to waste I guess. So I sorta put it together, 'cause I decided that would be the right thing to do. But I really only wanted the bike. It was RIGHTEOUS!!!
I think the shirt thing is just like the stock market - it's basically a closed system where my gain is your loss and visa versa - whoever can outsmart the other by making accurate predictions gets more, but it's in a constant flux. True stock market millionaires can loose every penny the have - and then make it all back just by staying in the market.
The McVeigh thing (death penalty) was intended to be a deterant to the masses (like almost every one of us, we don't wanna die from a potassium chloride heart failure overdose) so we fear being executed (a polite term for it's intended purpose). The thing is tho... if it's intended to be a deterant, then why are there "death rows" and executions all the time? The death penalty does not deter those people from their crimes - and they are the only one's that do them. Also life in prison instead, would be worse I think... a lifetime to contemplate themselves being locked up in a prison cell until biological death takes them - a long slow death, and no person to directly cause it.
About a perfect place. What if we already had everything we needed, but couldn't agree on who get's to have it? This would be a good time to learn about formal logic and the 13 fallacies of relevance in arguing:
1. Argumentum ad Baculum (appeal to force)
2. Argumentum ad Hominem (abusive)
3. Argumentum ad Hominem (circumstantial)
4. Argumentum ad Ignorantiam (argument from ignorance)
5. Argumentum ad Misericordiam (appeal to pity)
6. Argumentum ad Populum
7. Argumentum ad Verecundiam (appeal to authority)
8. Accident
9. Converse Accident
10. False Cause
11. Petitio Principii (begging the question)
12. Complex Question
13. Ignoratio Elenchi (irrelevant conclusion)
Forever Never Stops
--------------------
[red]0011 0001 0010 1111 0011 0000[/red]
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Buy Bali Kratom Powder 
Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale 
Red Vein Kratom
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 all )
Sclorch
cleaner
OldWoodSpecter
Northernsoul
MOTH
kaiowas
sirreal