Page 1 of 30 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 439
  1. #1
    GemQuest Moderator Gary Wassner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    new york, ny usa
    Posts
    4,633

    Applying the subjective, Part II

    If every morality is a recipe for a certain type of man, an explication of a vision of what man might be, then is morality aesthetics after all?

  2. #2
    >:|Angry Beaver|:< Fung Koo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The Fung Küniverse (Currently: İstanbul)
    Posts
    2,473
    Blog Entries
    1
    So why are there three of these threads?

  3. #3
    GemQuest Moderator Gary Wassner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    new york, ny usa
    Posts
    4,633
    Not sure what you mean.

  4. #4
    Fulgurous Moderator KatG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    In a Cloud
    Posts
    12,354
    Because this is Gary's favorite subject.

    Okay, morality and subjectivity. This is not my area of expertise. I can only go by my own thoughts on the matter. Which is that morality is not aesthetic. It is a matter of many different factors -- biology, threat levels, emotions, comprehension of context, time pressures, culture and religious belief, personal experience, etc., that all effect how we see things but are not all subjective.

  5. #5
    Just Another Philistine Hereford Eye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Charter Member, Restore Pluto Initiative
    Posts
    4,696
    Isn't morality more prescriptive than ruminative?
    Having identified a morality, a person attempts to act out that morality. It works even better when lots of people agree with the man's identified morality. See the Tale of the Bagelman in Freakonomics. Evidently, in our culture, there is a high level of agreement.

    Why were there three threads? The Quester had the flu which weakened his iron will enough to allow his other personalities freedom to ask questions. In an illustrative case of shared morality, they alll came up with the same question.
    Last edited by Hereford Eye; February 25th, 2008 at 04:51 PM.

  6. #6
    GemQuest Moderator Gary Wassner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    new york, ny usa
    Posts
    4,633
    The real question is, is morality just a matter of taste, are the definitions we come up with for good and bad arbitrary, just a matter or taste? Once again we're dealing with qualitative issues. How different is it really to claim something is good or bad from claiming it's beautiful or ugly?

  7. #7
    >:|Angry Beaver|:< Fung Koo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The Fung Küniverse (Currently: İstanbul)
    Posts
    2,473
    Blog Entries
    1
    Yeah I'd go for morality as principally aesthetic. Most people mean Law, Order, and Justice when they say Morality.

    If you compare morality and justice as being part of the same system, it's no wonder our current relativistic state has come up with this retarded notion of "hate crimes."

    Who cares why you committed the crime, it's the action that's supposed to be punished. What's next -- "hungry theft"? If you're starving because you're a crazy homeless person, by all means rob a grocery store. The theft wasn't so good, but your reasoning is valid. You're special and the rules don't apply because you're crazy homeless and hungry.

    Good and bad motivation?

    Eff that.

  8. #8
    Just Another Philistine Hereford Eye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Charter Member, Restore Pluto Initiative
    Posts
    4,696
    I suubmit that it makes no practical difference which way you go.

    Update: Given that every group of two or more people establishes its own operating morality, code of conduct if you will, and the existence of said moralities contributes mightily to the conflict in our world, would it be desirable, as some current moralities seem to think, to convince everyone to abide by a single morality?
    Last edited by Hereford Eye; February 26th, 2008 at 08:40 AM.

  9. #9
    >:|Angry Beaver|:< Fung Koo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The Fung Küniverse (Currently: İstanbul)
    Posts
    2,473
    Blog Entries
    1
    Under multiculturalism... difficult to say.

    In theory, one culture = one set of morals. So multiple cultures is multiple moralities. But what happens when two or more sets of morals provide different answers for one problem? This is why I think social morality needs to be arrived at democratically in a multicultural society.

    Which is why the jury system seems like a good idea up until the "peerhood" of ones peers is called into question by multicultural reality. Can we be guaranteed that jury members of different cultural backgrounds are holding up different shades of one morality? Or are they representing their own cultural morality within a different system of morality? If so, is their judgment viable?

    Hell, is the legal system even reflective of morality in the first place?

  10. #10
    Just Another Philistine Hereford Eye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Charter Member, Restore Pluto Initiative
    Posts
    4,696
    No, the legal system is about laws.
    In the beginning, much flag waving and appropriate rhetoric was given to the idea of Justice but that gradually faded into oblivion as we elevated The Law to a position of godhood. Consider the marriage of the terms Law and Order.

  11. #11
    >:|Angry Beaver|:< Fung Koo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The Fung Küniverse (Currently: İstanbul)
    Posts
    2,473
    Blog Entries
    1
    An awful lot of the laws sound like morals to me... Thou shalt not kill (it's bad), thou shalt not steal (it's bad too), thou shalt not nail thy neighbour or his wife (doubly bad in the first, still bad in the second)...

    Granted laws seem to only reflect the bad side of morality. But didn't the law come from morals? And isn't Order just the branch of the system that is supposed to make sure you're being morally good, and to catch you if you're morally bad?

  12. #12
    Just Another Philistine Hereford Eye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Charter Member, Restore Pluto Initiative
    Posts
    4,696
    Distinguish between possible laws (sic commandments) and The Law as used in the good ole U.S. of A. I do not believe there are any laws on the books in the U.S. that begin "Thou shalt not." While this is disappointing to many citizens, many other citizens are quite comfortable with this state of affairs.

  13. #13
    >:|Angry Beaver|:< Fung Koo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The Fung Küniverse (Currently: İstanbul)
    Posts
    2,473
    Blog Entries
    1
    Yeah, I know there's the whole "separation of church and state" thing... What other source do you suggest is the basis for the American constitution?

  14. #14
    GemQuest Moderator Gary Wassner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    new york, ny usa
    Posts
    4,633
    Separation of Church and State? And yet our money says "In God We Trust"?

    The fact is that our entire legal system presupposes a Judeo Christian ethic, which defines good and bad from a philosophical POV, the premises of which are derived from a belief in first principles, ipso facto, God.

  15. #15
    Just Another Philistine Hereford Eye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Charter Member, Restore Pluto Initiative
    Posts
    4,696
    And yet our money also carries many FreeMason symbols. Which ones really mean something to us today?
    Lest you assume I am merely arguing for the sake of arguing - which I am known to do - consider this:
    http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/s...7/secular.html

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •