Moral Algebra

[Panjandrum]

Hmm. I think a more interesting question is: why is there a code at all? Why not act as a free agent, unrestricted by such a thing?

[infamous]

I agree that only a sentient being is subject to judgements of morality. The problem remains, however, that since you cannot see into anothers mind, there is no way to assign moral value to someones thoughts.

 

If I ran over a sweet, kindly man who had never done any evil, and who was a source of joy and happiness to all who knew him, it would not matter if I had mistaken him for the man who murdered my child. Only my action is moral, the thought behind it is merely the justification for my action.

 

Given that only an action can be judged in this way, I would contend that only actions which directly limit anothers autonomy are immoral, since such actions limit a persons ability to act in a moral manner. Obviously, this would include killing someone, but would also cover such things as imprisonment or even coercion or persuasion, since such things will modify a persons behaviour and therefore limit thier autonomy.

You make it sound like the human consciousness has no commonalty or similarity of persuasion. Those that express such views are typically unappreciative of the triumph of civilization over barbarism. A man is not an island unto himself, he shares this planet with the rest of his brotherhood and the effective exercise of morality defines the success or failure of this ordered relationship....................Infy

[ldsoftwaresteve]

Hmm. I think a more interesting question is: why is there a code at all? Why not act as a free agent, unrestricted by such a thing?

Well, the truth is we can. But we aren't free from the success or failure of the path we choose. I assume that a moral code should provide universal success.

There are those who prey on others. But without the 'others', the victims, they could not survive. So, their survival is dependent on the victims moral code. I refer, of course, to victims who produce and who are not preying on others.

A rule of thumb might be: if your moral code requires victims, it is irrational and anti life. Pro-life is that which provides guidelines for successful life (being able to continue living and to maintain one's happiness).

[Panjandrum]

You make it sound like the human consciousness has no commonalty or similarity of persuasion. Those that express such views are typically unappreciative of the triumph of civilization over barbarism.

 

Haha, its funny you should say that. Ive often thought twould be better too have lived in the stone age. Simpler. More honest.

[Panjandrum]

Well, the truth is we can. But we aren't free from the success or failure of the path we choose. I assume that a moral code should provide universal success.

 

I cannot agree. I view morality as a zero sum game. Either everyone loses, or some win and some lose.

 

There are those who prey on others. But without the 'others', the victims, they could not survive. So, their survival is dependent on the victims moral code. I refer, of course, to victims who produce and who are not preying on others.

 

Such relationships are two way. The 'parasite' must provide something the 'victim' wants, or twould not work :evil:.

 

A rule of thumb might be: if your moral code requires victims, it is irrational and anti life. Pro-life is that which provides guidelines for successful life (being able to continue living and to maintain one's happiness).

 

Thats nice?

[Panjandrum]

Idnt care about that. Id rather have a short life of simple plesasure than a long life of tedium and restraint. Who needs the internet when you have a whole tribe to control?

[ldsoftwaresteve]

Panjandrum:

I cannot agree. I view morality as a zero sum game. Either everyone loses, or some win and some lose.

But we have different definitions don't we. Or do we. I say morality is intricately woven around thought, you say it is only associated with actions. And I just realized the flaw in that: Thoughts are actions. So I guess I have to agree with you but only if you agree that thoughts fall into the category of moral/immoral.

 

I happen to think that for us to discuss this with the intent to identify the truth in the subject, we are being as moral as we can be.

 

If you were placed into a forest on a world containing no other 'intelligent' life, would you need morality?

[ldsoftwaresteve]

Panjandrum brings up very clear issues even though his methods seem somewhat shocking. If the essence of morality is truthfulness, then he is being moral in saying the things that he's said. They are valid points.

 

How IS truthfulness tied to morality?

 

Now we can pretend that has nothing to do with morality ("Truth has nothing to do with morality!"), but we'd have to accept truthfulness to believe that and in so doing, we'd contradict our stance.

 

And that gets back to the question of "would you need morality if you were the last person on earth (assuming you'd want to live)?"

[Panjandrum]

Who's to say you'd even control a tribe?

 

You can't trust anybody!:evil:

So why would the Tribe trust you to lead them?

they wouldn't. They would tell you what to do, or you'd leave and be on your own.

 

If I was in your tribe you would not be in control.

Back in those days, Might Makes Right... and I could kick your ***! :D

 

Besides, a Good leader has the people as the main concern/consideration.

Not your adolescent power trip fantasies :naughty:

 

Oh, I have my ways ;)

 

Idnt want to be the 'chief', of course. Im not into being the 'obvious' leader. Id be more likely to be the chiefs' mistress, and control him and thru him the tribe subtley. In my opinion, such a role is what I am 'for' in an evolutionary sense.

 

Of course the wellfare of the tribe would be my top concern! If they die, I die. The diffrence is, I could make the descicions that need to be taken that some 'benevolent dictator' would be unable to make. Idnt care if my descisions were unpopular, because I know Id do whatever was necessary for the long-term survival of myself and my tribe.

 

And that gets back to the question of "would you need morality if you were the last person on earth (assuming you'd want to live)?"

 

I would say no, youdnt. Morality is a social construct, like language. With no-one else around, youd not need either.

[ldsoftwaresteve]

Originally Posted by IdSoftwareSteve

And that gets back to the question of "would you need morality if you were the last person on earth (assuming you'd want to live)?"

 

Panjandrum:

I would say no, youdnt. Morality is a social construct, like language. With no-one else around, youd not need either.

Ah, that's where we differ.

In my mind, morality is tied to something about our nature, specifically, we need to know what's true in order to survive. Other animals are born to be a certain way. We become the way we want to become and survive good or bad based upon the skills we develop. And in order to develop skills we need to respect what is true about our environment.

And if you extend that to the species, I put my weight behind our need to respect the truth and the search for truth. Nothing else matters to our species except what's true.

Morality should lay down the groundwork for tying value to truth even to the extent of making the truth an object of worship because it truly is our most fundamental value as a species.

[Panjandrum]

please explain your "ways"

 

Do you not think the Tribe Chief would not see through the Bullshit?

and what if you had competition?

 

That would be telling! :shrug:

 

Seriously tho, im very very good at what I do. Tis what I evolved for, after all. As for competition, well, thats what assasination was invented for.

 

If I was the Tribal Chief, do you think you could manipulate me? :hihi:

Or would you get exiled?

 

Of course I could! What makes you think youd be immune?

 

How would you care for the tribe? in simple terms?

Why would you even want to run a tribe if your main goal was tribal survival?

 

I would do what is necessary for the tribes well being. I have the clarity of sight to not be distracted by irrelevant stuff, but to go for the most effective solution.

[Panjandrum]

Ah, that's where we differ.

In my mind, morality is tied to something about our nature, specifically, we need to know what's true in order to survive. Other animals are born to be a certain way. We become the way we want to become and survive good or bad based upon the skills we develop. And in order to develop skills we need to respect what is true about our environment.

 

I dont see truth as being an external property of reality. I see it more as being a transformation your mind makes to some piece of knowledge when it aligns with your own preconceptions and desires. And I dont see the relationship between truth and morality.

 

Morality should lay down the groundwork for tying value to truth even to the extent of making the truth an object of worship because it truly is our most fundamental value as a species.

 

Odd sentiments. Surely the truth should free us from worship and superstition? You sound as tho you believ in an absolute 'truth' underlaying reality. And I still dont see the connection between truth and morality.

[ldsoftwaresteve]

Panjandrum:

Odd sentiments. Surely the truth should free us from worship and superstition? You sound as tho you believ in an absolute 'truth' underlaying reality. And I still dont see the connection between truth and morality.

If we raised up a shrine to the worst in all of us it wouldn't take long for folks to turn away from it. Worship is simply the way we take elements of an ideal and nail it down in the form of an icon. It's where we abstact out the good qualities and put them into something we can worship. We pick up the values in the icon.

It's a teaching mechanism for morality that doesn't put the children to sleep.

Honesty is a universal value, perhaps the universal value. Why do you think that is?

[Panjandrum]

Panjandrum: If we raised up a shrine to the worst in all of us it wouldn't take long for folks to turn away from it. Worship is simply the way we take elements of an ideal and nail it down in the form of an icon. It's where we abstact out the good qualities and put them into something we can worship. We pick up the values in the icon.

It's a teaching mechanism for morality that doesn't put the children to sleep.

 

Worship is a form of societal control. We dont worship what is best in us, we worship what we're told to worship. I dont consider the christian god to be a representtaion of the best of human nature, but rather a glorified desert god, vengeful, petty and cruel, who has lucked his way to the top table. Along the way, countless humans have wasted thier whole lives worshipping him, and writting books explaining how he is really all powerful and all good, yet still likes to test peoples faith and punish people arbitrarily. A bigger con I could hardly concieve of.

 

I agree its a teaching mechanism. But I dont think its teaching morality, rather social conformity and dependence.

 

Honesty is a universal value, perhaps the universal value. Why do you think that is?

 

I disagree. The need to survive will always trump honesty, as will the desire to remain autonomous.

[infamous]

 

 

If I could demonstrate that on average, I do more of these 'moral' actions than I do immoral ones, would I be able to legitimately claim to be a moral person? If not, why not?

Until a person understands the meaning of real love, that being concern for another without the expectation of recompense, they will not appreciate the meaning of morality. Greater joy is gained from 'loving', than the joy gained from 'being loved'. If one can't understand this statement, they will never understand morality...................Infy

[ldsoftwaresteve]

Panjandrum:

I disagree. The need to survive will always trump honesty, as will the desire to remain autonomous.

I don't disagree with that. The only question I'd have is how the hell do you survive without being honest? Sure, you can enslave those who aren't liars but your survival would still depend on their honesty.

And if you're all alone, try telling yourself that a mud pie is really apple or that someone will come and bring you food soon.

[Panjandrum]

People survive and cooperate out of self-interest, not a devotion to truth. It matters not to most people whether something is true or not, only that it is useful.