|
 CherryBom
Yoga Gypsy
 
Registered: 12/26/98
Posts: 11,177
Loc: Ontario
|
 Right and Wrong 
#407330 - 09/28/01 08:04 AM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Who gets to decide? I don't think anything is right or wrong.
If my sister takes a shirt out of my closet, she justifies this action by thinking that 1) I won't mind 2) I've done it to her before so it's okay. So in her head, there is no problem. Now when I go to my closet looking for that particular shirt and find that it's not there I am angry at her for not having the common decency to ask first and a loud battle of 'right and wrong' ensues.
Neither of us is right and neither is wrong although we both are positive that we are right. If a mediator were brought in to tell us who is right, that person as well would be able to make neither a right or wrong decision because that person is human.
On a much more dramatic scale, Timothy McVeigh. What he did was justified to himself. He thought that what he was doing was the right thing. In the end, someone had to make the decision that he was to die and someone had to push the button (or whatever) that released poisonous chemicals into his bloodstream. Was that person right, or wrong? Neither.
Not a single human being can make a decision that is either right or wrong...so who gets to decide? Ah, if only the world were a perfect place.
But that wouldn't be any fun, now would it?
O~*
*********************************
It's not who or what you know...it's why... -SM
--------------------
|
 Droz
Love of Life
Registered: 10/15/00
Posts: 2,746
Loc: Floorida
Last seen: 8 years, 3 months
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: CherryBom]
#407389 - 09/28/01 09:54 AM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Having no right nor a wrong isn't perfect either.. be happy doing everything... somethings have right and wrong's like video games for instance but in real life there is no right or wrong way to grow vegetables is there? =) Nope...
A perfect world is a happy world. hehe
Love.
Destroy the ego free the real self.
--------------------
Evolution of Time.
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: CherryBom]
#407618 - 09/28/01 02:53 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I agree.
|
MokshaMan
enthusiast
Registered: 03/12/01
Posts: 280
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: CherryBom]
#407715 - 09/28/01 04:51 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I'd say there is a right and wrong based on the norms of society, if there weren't a right and wrong then anyone should and could do anything they pleased. Based on that logic I could HYPOTHETICALLY find you, rape you, torture you, and kill you because I justified it to myself that moderators were evil I wouldn't be doing anything wrong(this is not a threat, please don't take it as such). If, however, you were to say there's no right or wrong based solely on nature and man is something that was produced by nature I'd point out that we don't live as one with nature, but in society... I'll continue this another time...
--------------------
Men can only be happy when they do not assume that the object of life is happiness.
-- George Owell
|
CherryBom
Yoga Gypsy
Registered: 12/26/98
Posts: 11,177
Loc: Ontario
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: MokshaMan]
#407739 - 09/28/01 05:20 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
So who gets to decide what the 'norms' of society are? The lawyer who beats his wife? The doctor who operates a kiddie porn site? The almighty judge of the supreme court who is a coke feind? No one deserves to make these decisions. Everyone has skeletons in thier closets.
No one has the 'right' to judge.
O~*
*********************************
It's not who or what you know...it's why... -SM
--------------------
|
geokills
∙∙∙∙☼ º¿° ☼∙∙∙∙
Registered: 05/08/01
Posts: 23,237
Loc: city of angels
Last seen: 1 hour, 22 minutes
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: CherryBom]
#407844 - 09/28/01 07:35 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
that's excellent!
too many people fall into the trap that the morals of society are laws to live by. i'm not saying to go out and kill people, but i don't like the idea that society can classify everyone and as such, judge everyone - which in turn causes people to judge other people. i make it a point to never get down on someone because of something they do or how they think... everyone is entitled to be and/or do what they want to.
? ? ? -????? O ?????-? ? ? ?
Weed Legalization Freedom Fighter
? ? ? -????? O ?????-? ? ? ?
--------------------
--------------------
┼ ··∙ long live the shroomery ∙·· ┼
...╬π╥  ╥π╬...
|
MokshaMan
enthusiast
Registered: 03/12/01
Posts: 280
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: CherryBom]
#407882 - 09/28/01 08:49 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I need to remember not to post when I'm in a rush, not only did I not make the point that I wanted to, I ended up making little to no point at all. There is a right and a wrong, that doesn't mean that everything falls into the category of right and wrong. For example, homosexuality is something that's often called wrong. For consenting adults who no one is forcing to participate in homosexual acts, there's no right or wrong attached to it. But say someone forces another against their will to participate in a homosexual act, the person that's forcing the act is wrong. No one has the right to force their will on someone else, therefore the act is wrong. The norms and mores of society is a bad example and I apologize for that. If anything you do infringes on another person's rights or beliefs then you're doing something wrong and the reverse holds true(this must be forcefully, not simply a verbal opinion, objection, etc). I mean if there's no right or wrong, does that mean that the biggest person or the strongest person gets to decide because they can physically force you to do whatever they want. While I'll agree that right and wrong are terms that are carelessly thrown about with little regard to the truth of the statements.
Another much simpler example of there being a right and a wrong, if you add 2 and 2 you get 4 anything else is wrong although I'm sure you'll claim this is a different type of right and wrong more of a true false. Although true and false are similiar to right and wrong, there are things that are true(like 2+2=4), things that are false(such as 3-1=4), and lots of things that fall into neither catogory(that shirt is cool).
As far as having the right to judge other people, we don't have that right; however, are we to let men and women run mad through the streets raping, stealing, and killing? I know that the majority wouldn't do this if every authority figure were to suddenly disappear, but I believe a large enough portion of the population would enforce their will on others(becoming a new and possibly worse authority figure) that there would no longer be a need to worry of right and wrong simply a strugle to survive(similiar to what's happening in Afghanistan, which is why mores and norms of society is a bad example). 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.
--------------------
Men can only be happy when they do not assume that the object of life is happiness.
-- George Owell
|
Droz
Love of Life
Registered: 10/15/00
Posts: 2,746
Loc: Floorida
Last seen: 8 years, 3 months
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: MokshaMan]
#407924 - 09/28/01 10:31 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
force is not "wrong" and it may not seem "right" to some people... but to be such a "right" and "wrong" world is only two concepts which aren't really concepts at all just opinions.
Opinions.
Love.
Destroy the ego free the real self.
--------------------
Evolution of Time.
|
DragonAlienFest1
Stranger
Registered: 03/31/00
Posts: 23
Loc: Seattle metropolitan area...
Last seen: 17 years, 4 months
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: CherryBom]
#407934 - 09/28/01 11:11 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I agree with the original post. There is no universal right or wrong action. There are actions that are right or wrong for individuals, societies etc. The right and wrong in these situations is determined by what the majority of the group or the individual believe is right, but what they believe is right is only right from their perspective and not universally right.
To say that there are actions that are universally right or wrong is to suggest that there is a higher power.
And just because there are no right or wrong actions doesn't mean that no one should act on what they belive is right or wrong; that would be impossible.
--------------------
Completely straightup downright digging it. Can you dig it?
|
tchyted
miestro
Registered: 09/03/01
Posts: 526
Loc: WA near seattle
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: CherryBom]
#407947 - 09/28/01 11:50 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
be content, even happy that you have a sister to steal your shirt in the first place.
Edited by tchyted on 09/29/01 12:52 AM.
|
CherryBom
Yoga Gypsy
Registered: 12/26/98
Posts: 11,177
Loc: Ontario
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: tchyted]
#407959 - 09/29/01 12:08 AM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
My sister is a cool broad.
O~*
*********************************
It's not who or what you know...it's why... -SM
--------------------
|
MrKurtz
enthusiast
Registered: 08/04/01
Posts: 303
Last seen: 21 years, 8 months
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: CherryBom]
#408142 - 09/29/01 09:06 AM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
eh, right and wrong is a very interesting thing to argue over, but if there was no right or wrong, society would suck. The easiest way to decide whether something is right or wrong, is (someone else already brought this up) if someone does something that goes against the will of another.
But, that also gets kind of hazy, like if i enjoy speeding and a cop pulls me over for going twice the speed limit, even though its the middle of the night and no one else is there. To advance the human race, you can't make everything perfect. I think we all would agree that killing, raping, beating people up, and stealing are wrong. But then, is using drugs wrong? It only hurts you really, but what if you go driving stoned out of your mind, get in an accident, and kill someone. It doesn't impair your ability to do things much at all, but its still a little bit. So, you could hurt others. But, driving while getting BJ from your girlfriend is probably just as dangerous, so should we outlaw BJ's?
|
MokshaMan
enthusiast
Registered: 03/12/01
Posts: 280
|
|
If there is no universal right and wrong, why are somethings comdemned by all societies? I mean no society accepts the rape, murder, violence against another, and so on; well unless they're state sponsored(doesn't make it right just means they have the power and do what they want). But then I think about canablistic societies, who do kill people as food. Is it hunting or murder? Like I said before I think a lot of things that are called right and wrong aren't really right and wrong, doesn't mean there aren't things that are right or wrong.
--------------------
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: 21 years, 8 months
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: MokshaMan]
#408215 - 09/29/01 11:05 AM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Like the vikings and mongols, its ok to murder rape and pillage people as long as they weren't from your tribe. Its pretty much universal that people are not supposed to harm members of there society that are "citizens", unless you are in someway better then them (the king could do whatever the fuck he wants, but no one would stand for a slave going around punching people in the nose).
|
gnrm23
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 08/29/99
Posts: 6,488
Loc: n. e. OH, USSA
Last seen: 1 month, 27 days
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: CherryBom]
#409405 - 09/30/01 05:29 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
right & wrong...
hmmmm, "sin" is intentionally causing harm to another...
so now we can look at "intentional", "cause", "harm", and "another"...
(harming yourself may be sily, but it shouldhardly be consderd a "sin" (or a "crime" either)...)
old enough to know better
not old enough to care
--------------------
old enough to know better
not old enough to care
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: MokshaMan]
#409441 - 09/30/01 05:56 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
> No one has the right to force their will on someone else, therefore the act is wrong.
Why not?
> If anything you do infringes on another person's rights or beliefs then you're doing something wrong and the reverse holds true(this must be forcefully, not simply a verbal opinion, objection, etc
What "rights" do we have and how are they determined?
Rights are abstract. There are a system which we created to philosophically justify the law.
Authority is supposed to dictate what is "Right" and may or may not be done, but authority is simply the ability to dictate your will upon others. Authority is an abstraction, as are personal rights.
> I mean if there's no right or wrong, does that mean that the biggest person or the strongest person gets to decide because they can physically force you to do whatever they want.
Sure. And the technologically advanced could then defend themselves from bullies. And groups of humans could for "societies" to maintain relative peace.
> Another much simpler example of there being a right and a wrong, if you add 2 and 2 you get 4 anything else is wrong although I'm sure you'll claim this is a different type of right and wrong more of a true false. Although true and false are similiar to right and wrong, there are things that are true(like 2+2=4), things that are false(such as 3-1=4), and lots of things that fall into neither catogory(that shirt is cool).
The original post was about ethics and morality, IMO. What does mathematics have to do with this? Can mathematical truth be used in a court of law as a rationale for passing laws? I think not.
> As far as having the right to judge other people, we don't have that right;
But I do it anyways, all the time.
> however, are we to let men and women run mad through the streets raping, stealing, and killing?
You don't have to let them when there's no right or wrong. Anyway, in this world, the authorities do run around detaining, arresting, stealing and killing people (classified as "criminals").
> I believe a large enough portion of the population would enforce their will on others(becoming a new and possibly worse authority figure)
Yep, authority is just an abstraction, and has nothing to do with right or wrong.
> 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?
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: MokshaMan]
#409452 - 09/30/01 06:04 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
> If there is no universal right and wrong, why are somethings comdemned by all societies? I mean no society accepts the rape, murder, violence against another, and so on;
Well, if the examples you listed were actually condemned by all societies, it still wouldn't make it a universal right or wrong. The human race is simply not the entire universe. Do animals not count? Or the possibility of life on other worlds?
Rape, murder and violence have all been acceptable in societies depending on their context. In war, rape was considered acceptable (long ago, pre-modern times). Murder is accepted in the form of war. Violence in the arresting of criminals.
Context dictates when an action (eg// killing a person) is to be condemned (such as if the person is a total stranger) or not (such as in self defence).
So you see, by decontextualizing, actions are not universally right or wrong across the human race. By using words such as "murder" you are putting an action (killing a human) into a given context. And by the way, the definition of murder is contextualized within moral boundaries (murder is the *wrongful* killing of a human being, whatever "wrongful" is).
|
Anonymous
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: Kid]
#409587 - 09/30/01 08:44 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
>>What "rights" do we have and how are they determined?
Every human has the right of free will. They may do whatever they choose to express their free will as long as it does not infinge upon the free will of another human.
That is our right. It is determined by Creation.
|
MrKurtz
enthusiast
Registered: 08/04/01
Posts: 303
Last seen: 21 years, 8 months
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: Kid]
#409597 - 09/30/01 08:49 PM (22 years, 2 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? Nothing is perfect, but the idea of "Right and Wrong" in our society is close enough.
"In war, rape was considered acceptable (long ago, pre-modern times). Murder is accepted in the form of war. Violence in the arresting of criminals."
Well, I don't think we are talking about long ago, and no one today thinks its ok to rape women of other nations you are at war with. Murder in war is pretty much self defense, and war itself is usually thought of as wrong. 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. If you beat a criminal up because you think hes mean, thats wrong. If you don't run, the cops aren't gonna beat you up unless they're bad cops.
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. But its not very likely that you are, so i would believe that you are a "real" person, and this world is "real".
|
MrKurtz
enthusiast
Registered: 08/04/01
Posts: 303
Last seen: 21 years, 8 months
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: ]
#409601 - 09/30/01 08:51 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
what if the free will of 2 beings conflict?
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: MrKurtz]
#409729 - 09/30/01 11:17 PM (22 years, 2 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 (22 years, 2 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 (22 years, 2 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 (22 years, 2 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: 21 years, 9 months
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: MokshaMan]
#409833 - 10/01/01 02:41 AM (22 years, 2 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 (22 years, 2 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 (22 years, 2 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 (22 years, 2 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 (22 years, 2 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: 21 years, 8 months
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: Kid]
#410445 - 10/01/01 07:15 PM (22 years, 2 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 (22 years, 2 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: 21 years, 10 months
|
Re: Right and Wrong [Re: CherryBom]
#411089 - 10/02/01 09:18 AM (22 years, 2 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
Buy Bali Kratom Powder 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds 
Kratom Powder For Sale 
North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies 
Red Vein Kratom
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 all )
Sclorch
cleaner
OldWoodSpecter
Northernsoul
MOTH
kaiowas
sirreal