Warr_E_Er
Newbie
Karma: +4/-0
Posts: 49
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: April 22, 2008, 05:39:04 PM » |
|
Here are some quotes from Nietzsche: From Human, All Too Human
"being evil is being 'not moral' (immoral), practicing immorality, resisting tradition, however reasonable or stupid tradition may be. Harming the neighbor, however, has been felt to be preeminently harmful in all the moral laws of different ages, until now the word 'evil' is associated primarily with the deliberate harming of the neighbor.
Not 'egoistic' and 'unegoistic' is the fundamental pair of contraries that has led men to distinguish moral and immoral, good and evil, but rather: being tied to a tradition and law, and detachment from them. How the tradition originated is indifferent; in any case it was without any regard for good and evil or any immanent categorical imperative, but above all in order to preserve a community, a people: every superstitious custom that originated on the basis of some misinterpreted accident involves a tradition that it is moral to follow; for detaching oneself from it is dangerous, even more dangerous for the community than for the individual..."
From Mixed Opinions & Maxims
The origin of mores may be found in two thoughts: 'society is worth more than the individual,' and 'enduring advantage is to be preferred to ephemeral advantage' from which it follows that the enduring advantage of society must be given precedence, unconditionally, over the advantage of the individual..." IOW, according to Nietzsche, morality is used to uphold a culture. This is best demonstrated on the battle field by soldiers who risk their lives for their country or their families, etc... It just so happens that most (if not all) cultures benefit more from the sanctity of life rather than apathy towards it. Life is sacred because culture says so, not because it has inherent value. Do you agree? Iamme makes a good point, that we cannot fashion individual morality on evolution (i.e. survival of the fittest). However, this would apply to cultures. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I think, therefore I am loved
“Every baby starts life as a little savage. He is completely selfish and self-centered... If permitted to continue in the self-centered world of infancy, ... every child would grow up a criminal, a thief, a killer, a rapist.”
-Minnesota Crime Commission
|
|
|
Factinista
Full Member
Karma: +17/-34
Posts: 210
|
|
« Reply #31 on: April 23, 2008, 06:37:05 AM » |
|
My point was not to say that we should act as "good little Darwinists", in fact that would likley lead to more Social Darwinism. My attempt was to explain that what morality, and immorality, we have are PRODUCTS of evolution. The fact that we feel bad when we see people or animals suffer is a product of evolution. Somehow morality has indeed survived either because it is benificial to society or as an accidental outgrowth of it.
It is evolutionarily a good thing that we do not wantonly murder each other, the basic instinct which makes us moral is deep within our genes and we are making attempts on this forum to discover just what that is.
However those same genes that make us good parents and moral people also instil a sense of xenophobia and the ability to commit horrible injustices. We have exactly the morality, and immorality that evolved primates would have. We are helpfull and moral to those within our group and dangerously violent to those outside of our groups.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +197/-195
Posts: 3,662
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #32 on: April 23, 2008, 08:02:24 AM » |
|
Murder is by definition, 'illegal' killing of human beings. Our society acknowledges and legally permits several categories of 'legal' killing of human beings.
Ergo, "murder" is a matter of circumstance. In some circumstances, killing human beings is quite legal and in many cases, held to be moral too. Not neccesarily. It's just the legal concept of murder actually alllys with immorality - even a broken clock is right twice a day. The one thing we have to ourselves in this world is our life. Take that and you've committed more than a crime against the victim, but also the universe. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
|
Dormouse
|
|
« Reply #33 on: April 23, 2008, 09:59:40 AM » |
|
IOW, according to Nietzsche, morality is used to uphold a culture. According to Nietzsche, morality serves many purposes, of which, that is one. Always be careful with Nietzsche - especially if you are new to him. Nietzsche is very complex and if you think you understood what he meant the first time you read him, you are probably mistaken. Reading Nietzsche is like peeling layers off an onion. Read the same passage twice and you may have a different interpretation the 2nd time. Life is sacred because culture says so, not because it has inherent value. Do you agree? Absolutely. Though I'm not sure if Nietzsche would agree with that. Iamme makes a good point, that we cannot fashion individual morality on evolution (i.e. survival of the fittest). However, this would apply to cultures. Yes we can. Many do this all the time. Fact is, it doesn't work very well. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dormouse
|
|
« Reply #34 on: April 23, 2008, 10:01:38 AM » |
|
Not neccesarily. It's just the legal concept of murder actually alllys with immorality - even a broken clock is right twice a day. I haven't a clue what you mean by this. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IamMe
|
|
« Reply #35 on: April 23, 2008, 12:59:02 PM » |
|
Yes we can. Many do this all the time. Fact is, it doesn't work very well.
Some do, mostly those who do not fully understand science. I mean, even ultra-Darwinist Richard Dawkins says that evolution is a terrible basis for morality. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
\\\\"Anarchism is the ideal to which all societies should approximate\\\\" - Bertrand Russell
If you strike me down I shall become more dead than you can ever imagine.
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +197/-195
Posts: 3,662
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #36 on: April 23, 2008, 01:06:11 PM » |
|
Not neccesarily. It's just the legal concept of murder actually alllys with immorality - even a broken clock is right twice a day. I haven't a clue what you mean by this. Just cause the state also says murder is immoral doesn't mean it's a case of an orginization dictating right and wrong. Murder is still immoral. It's just the state also agrees. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
|
IamMe
|
|
« Reply #37 on: April 23, 2008, 01:06:32 PM » |
|
Our society would not function without moral absolutes.
The only moral absolute is that it is absolutely wrong to cause unnecessary* harm to another. Any other moral absolutes lead to the situation where the action that will cause the least harm or provide the most benefit is a priori immoral because it violates some absolute moral principle. * Necessary means where no causing harm would allow a greater harm to occur. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
\\\\"Anarchism is the ideal to which all societies should approximate\\\\" - Bertrand Russell
If you strike me down I shall become more dead than you can ever imagine.
|
|
|
|
Dormouse
|
|
« Reply #38 on: April 24, 2008, 10:34:29 AM » |
|
The only moral absolute is that it is absolutely wrong to cause unnecessary* harm to another. Any other moral absolutes lead to the situation where the action that will cause the least harm or provide the most benefit is a priori immoral because it violates some absolute moral principle.
*Necessary means where no causing harm would allow a greater harm to occur.
Sorry, this one isn't absolute, even with your caveat. Spanking, capital punishment and war easily violate this rule. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IamMe
|
|
« Reply #39 on: April 24, 2008, 12:10:42 PM » |
|
The only moral absolute is that it is absolutely wrong to cause unnecessary* harm to another. Any other moral absolutes lead to the situation where the action that will cause the least harm or provide the most benefit is a priori immoral because it violates some absolute moral principle.
*Necessary means where no causing harm would allow a greater harm to occur.
Sorry, this one isn't absolute, even with your caveat. Spanking, capital punishment and war easily violate this rule. Spanking: wrong Capital punishment: wrong War: wrong except in very limited circumstances. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
\\\\"Anarchism is the ideal to which all societies should approximate\\\\" - Bertrand Russell
If you strike me down I shall become more dead than you can ever imagine.
|
|
|
|
Dormouse
|
|
« Reply #40 on: April 24, 2008, 02:42:08 PM » |
|
Spanking: wrong
Capital punishment: wrong
These sound to me like arbitrary subjective assertions of personal opinion. War: wrong except in very limited circumstances. This is not only an arbitrary subjective assertion, it is also wishy-washy and imprecise. Traditional moral systems don't admit of 'gray' areas. Gray areas are subjective by definition. Your answers appear more like replies to a survey of personal opinons rather than replies to a philosophic argument. (I'm not trying to denigrate you, only trying to move the discussion towards something that can be discussed besides arbitary subjective assertions). |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 24, 2008, 02:43:52 PM by Dormouse »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Warr_E_Er
Newbie
Karma: +4/-0
Posts: 49
|
|
« Reply #41 on: April 24, 2008, 07:04:24 PM » |
|
Spanking: wrong
Capital punishment: wrong
These sound to me like arbitrary subjective assertions of personal opinion. War: wrong except in very limited circumstances. This is not only an arbitrary subjective assertion, it is also wishy-washy and imprecise. Traditional moral systems don't admit of 'gray' areas. Gray areas are subjective by definition. Your answers appear more like replies to a survey of personal opinons rather than replies to a philosophic argument. (I'm not trying to denigrate you, only trying to move the discussion towards something that can be discussed besides arbitary subjective assertions). Even at that, I think we are diverging from the initial subject. The intent is to justify a material morality. We have briefly discussed Kant (whom we kind of just skimmed over), and now Nietzsche. I will continue to look for additional Nietzsche quotes in my reading (and I would appreciate your input on Nietzsche also, Dormouse). We still have not explained how morality coheres with a material world view. More specifically, we have not justified life as sacred, the begging axiom. Since, as Iamme pointed out that natural selection is a poor base for morality, where do we get it from? Do we really believe the survival of a culture supersedes human life? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I think, therefore I am loved
“Every baby starts life as a little savage. He is completely selfish and self-centered... If permitted to continue in the self-centered world of infancy, ... every child would grow up a criminal, a thief, a killer, a rapist.”
-Minnesota Crime Commission
|
|
|
bringbackwigs
Professional Post-Whore
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +138/-183
Posts: 2,973
Please refrain from taking my posts seriously
|
|
« Reply #42 on: April 24, 2008, 07:57:24 PM » |
|
Why is spanking wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
In religion and politics, people\\'s beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second hand, and without examination. - Mark Twain  |
|
|
|
IamMe
|
|
« Reply #43 on: April 25, 2008, 08:20:31 AM » |
|
Why is spanking wrong?
It is assault. Children have a right to bodily integrity too. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
\\\\"Anarchism is the ideal to which all societies should approximate\\\\" - Bertrand Russell
If you strike me down I shall become more dead than you can ever imagine.
|
|
|
|
IamMe
|
|
« Reply #44 on: April 25, 2008, 08:22:55 AM » |
|
Spanking: wrong
Capital punishment: wrong
These sound to me like arbitrary subjective assertions of personal opinion. War: wrong except in very limited circumstances. This is not only an arbitrary subjective assertion, it is also wishy-washy and imprecise. Traditional moral systems don't admit of 'gray' areas. Gray areas are subjective by definition. Your answers appear more like replies to a survey of personal opinons rather than replies to a philosophic argument. (I'm not trying to denigrate you, only trying to move the discussion towards something that can be discussed besides arbitary subjective assertions). We are not discussing those issues, I thought it was best simply to point out that your examples were not clearcut. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
\\\\"Anarchism is the ideal to which all societies should approximate\\\\" - Bertrand Russell
If you strike me down I shall become more dead than you can ever imagine.
|
|
|
|
