This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - More Than Mortal
Pages: 1 ... 303304305 306307 ... 502
9121
« on: January 06, 2015, 05:00:07 PM »
Literally jargon, the post.
>moral sentences express propositions >propositions make claims to truth >moral propositions can relate to objective facts about the world >some moral propositions have the capacity to be true
9122
« on: January 06, 2015, 04:57:50 PM »
I'm kinda with you, to be honest. Though, "morality" is kind of a stupid word.
I don't think it's necessarily the word; I mean, all it denotes is that some ought do something (if the act in question is defined as "moral"). The problem only occurs when people begin to think hard about morality as a concept. People somehow confuse themselves and feel like there's nothing one objectively ought to do, despite the fact that's an obviously ridiculous and untenable conclusion. Hell, even the moral relativists are moral realists when you reach the foundation; saying we should tolerate other people's moral values because nobody is objectively correct is both an ought statement and one which seeks to be propositional.
9123
« on: January 06, 2015, 04:55:16 PM »
What if there was such a situation that, given terrible suffering for everyone, would lead to an eventual pay-off? Is it morally sound because it eventually ends with something good for humanity if it entails large amounts of suffering? It could be possible to descend first in order to ascend later; one real-world example of this would be the IMF's requirement of countries to economically restructure, before getting any assistance. What if the difference in morality lies in the method, not the outcome? Is it morally correct to divert a train into a man working on the tracks if it means saving the lives of a couple of hikers, or is it more correct to not interfere? Or is it better to let someone live in a vegetative state, who feels no sensation be it pain or pleasure, or to pull the plug?
All morality is consequential--this is just necessary. Some moral questions don't, currently, have solid answers to us yet. Any real-life application of the train/trolley problem would have so many variables to consider. In essence, you can't reduce morality to a snapshot of mathematical considerations. For example, in such a situation of strict utilitarianism, it'd be better for a mother to save ten other children over her own son. However, when thought about properly, it is consequentially beneficial that we have these parent-child relationships when considering society at large. If a consequence of taking a purely mathematical view is this break-down in relationships involving trust, then it isn't positively consequential. Like, if I answer that I'd push the fat man in front of the train (in a modified scenario of the one you mention), people seem to think it's inconsistent for me to not advocate the murder of patients by doctors for the sake of harvesting their organs and saving more people. The trust relationship based on not being pushed off a bridge in front of a train is nowhere near as significant as the one based on being cared for--instead of murdered--by a doctor. Most people, when considering human well-being in the paradigm of some utilitarian philosophy, think very narrowly of what the term "consequence" means.
9124
« on: January 06, 2015, 04:40:07 PM »
When it comes to the study of meta-ethics, I consider myself a cognitivist, specifically a moral realist--even more specifically, an ethical naturalist.
Essentially, it's true that moral sentences express propositions which relate to objective features of the world and are thus cognitively meaningful. Morality, also, must necessarily relate to human flourishing--or eudaimonia--if it is to make any sense.
Taking this into consideration, the most solid moral fact we can therefore identify is: "It would be wrong to create a situation which would facilitate the worst possible suffering for everybody".
9125
« on: January 06, 2015, 03:47:29 PM »
help.
You have a funny definition of that word. The government is acting contrary to the expressed wishes of both the girl and the mother. That isn't, by any stretch of language, being "helpful".
9126
« on: January 06, 2015, 03:14:41 PM »
Fuck you, I still call him Mad Sacks.
9127
« on: January 06, 2015, 03:11:16 PM »
USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST
9128
« on: January 06, 2015, 03:02:27 PM »
I don't like it, but I respect her decision to refuse treatment--especially considering her mother is on board.
If she's willing to face the prospect of dying, then let her. She should, however, be tested for things like depression or bipolar disorder so we know she's making this decision with full presence of mind.
9129
« on: January 06, 2015, 12:20:41 PM »
I'm not debating that the Muslim's antisemitism was justified at all then - but it was hardly them alone at the time.
I'm not saying it was. I'm saying, taking the Palestine region, one contending group was gripped by religious fundamentalism and a horrible sense of xenophobia while the other was not.
9130
« on: January 06, 2015, 11:33:42 AM »
>still doesn't understand the oppression of minorities
Fucking Russians.
9131
« on: January 06, 2015, 10:51:18 AM »
Oh yeah. That's a thing.
Probably includes Deists, too.
9132
« on: January 06, 2015, 10:16:07 AM »
So?
When it comes to elected representatives, I really don't see the problem.
That might just be because I'm British, though, and the best Prime Minister we had was a woman.
9133
« on: January 06, 2015, 09:36:20 AM »
Unavailable in the US...
Now?
9134
« on: January 06, 2015, 09:34:39 AM »
Easily George Orwell's 1984.
Oh, and All Quiet on the Western Front.
AND the finale to House of Card's second season.
9135
« on: January 06, 2015, 09:33:04 AM »
9136
« on: January 06, 2015, 09:27:28 AM »
so are jokes about eating dead baby salsa with nachos. 
9137
« on: January 06, 2015, 08:43:42 AM »
Your TL:DR needs a TL:DR .
lazy cunt
9138
« on: January 05, 2015, 07:06:43 PM »
My antivirus is getting false positives from this thread.
Kiyo confirmed for voodoo satanist.
9139
« on: January 05, 2015, 06:53:30 PM »
I'm glad we don't have people like this in England.
9140
« on: January 05, 2015, 06:49:07 PM »
What the fuck are y-
You know, that does make sense.
9141
« on: January 05, 2015, 05:56:22 PM »
Little legend. He's either incredibly spoiled, or a complete narcissist.
9142
« on: January 05, 2015, 05:50:51 PM »
So you're telling us you feel exceptionally gay?
Good to know.
9143
« on: January 05, 2015, 05:39:43 PM »
Money doesn't mean anything in the end my friend.
In that case feel free to write me into your will.
Lol, much do you think I'm worth
Enough to pique my interest.
9144
« on: January 05, 2015, 05:39:02 PM »
GODDAMNIT PSY FUCKING LOCK THE THREAD YOU STUPID NIGGER MONKEY WANKNUGGET
9145
« on: January 05, 2015, 05:38:11 PM »
Money doesn't mean anything in the end my friend.
In that case feel free to write me into your will.
9146
« on: January 05, 2015, 05:36:55 PM »
>implying I am not a destroyer of cunts
You aren't. You're just a cunt.
9147
« on: January 05, 2015, 05:36:20 PM »
I'm bored now, somebody lock this.
9148
« on: January 05, 2015, 05:35:54 PM »
This is such a ridiculously stupid thread.
Like. . . I can't even fucking begin to comprehend what neurocognitive activity was occurring in your brain to make you do this.
9149
« on: January 05, 2015, 05:34:47 PM »
You've got money, you'll be fine.
The Rothschilds won't let their favourite minion die.
9150
« on: January 05, 2015, 05:33:37 PM »
His Yahoo is "Cunt Destroyer".
Pages: 1 ... 303304305 306307 ... 502
|
Show Posts