Paradigm shifts within ethics suffer violence

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

reasoning logic
 
Reply Mon 22 Feb, 2010 05:35 pm
@Jackofalltrades phil,
Jackofalltrades;130739 wrote:
Ahh..... now, i got what you meant by paradigm shifts. Thanks for the last sentence. now to the questions.

I like examples. Thats brings focus.


Morally wrong. Violation of natural law. In my view, cloning is unacceptable.



Morally not wrong. Continuation of natural law. In my view, giving employment is a good thing to do, instead of spending in frivolous pursuits.


Jackofalltrades. When you refer to natural law are you refering to Thomas Aquinas? If not please explain as There seems to be so many different view points of natural law.

Thomas Aquinas Says that "there is no problem from the fact that some men desire evil [the contrary of good]. For they desire evil only under the aspect of good, that is, insofar as they think it good. Hence their intention primarily aims at the good and only incidentally touches on the evil." Smile
 
Jackofalltrades phil
 
Reply Mon 22 Feb, 2010 11:29 pm
@reasoning logic,
No.... i am not referring to anyone.

Natural law could simply mean the law of nature as seen or experienced by man.
The little I know of Thomas A is that he heavily relied on Aristotles's exposition of natural law.

The diffrent view points on natural law is simply because of the variance in understanding or comprehending Nature and its so-called laws.
 
deepthot
 
Reply Tue 23 Feb, 2010 01:41 am
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic;131199 wrote:

Thomas Aquinas Says that "there is no problem from the fact that some men desire evil [the contrary of good]. For they desire evil only under the aspect of good, that is, insofar as they think it good. Hence their intention primarily aims at the good and only incidentally touches on the evil." Smile



That's a good quote, reasoned.

I believe I may cite it in the future. It's true: Al Capone, and other Mafia bosses did what they did in the name of goodness. They would claim they were doing "good," that they were helping out a lot of people.

In offering the new paradigm, rooted in value theory as its meta-language, when it is more fully developed and enriched by open-source input from all of you reaaders, what I am trying to do is this:

I am working to increase the amount of useful knowledge in this world.

Is this a valuable thing to do?

It may turn out that to break our bad habits we need to put in hundreds of hours of practicing being ethical, if that's what it takes, just as it does to become adept in any field, be it a sport (athletics), or a riverboat gambler. The expert has devoted a lot of time to his subject. ...something to think about.

The point is it will take a discipline, a frame of reference, this knowledge as to the how-to of self-improvement - doing what the study of Musicology does for must appreciation and composition - and it being put into childrens' books form, with lots of colorful illustrations - to get this knowledge into world culture. My three recent papers are just the merest start.

How do you feel about that??
 
reasoning logic
 
Reply Tue 23 Feb, 2010 06:30 pm
@deepthot,
It does apear that there may be many readers that would agree that the botom question would be moraly acceptable. I would like to know if I reworded the question and added your love ones into the picture if the reader might treat their love ones any different than the rest of the people.




Would it be immoral If you are highly intellectual and are able to come up with a scheme that would convince the intellectually challenged to be your work force?

You could hire administrators who would over see all of this, so that you could have more leisure time to come up with other great schemes.
Your administrators would have other people under them analysts, managers and so forth to teach the people that competition and rank are most important.

If you are clever enough the people will demand competition and rank as if it were their divine right, and if you are lucky your philosophy that you teach will seem more important than morality, Which in return would help you to keep the wages of the people low and your personal profits high.

[Meaning that if you could hire the person who is capable of performing a job and is in the most desperate situation caused by his/her environmental or psychological situation that your philosophy helps to create.
he/she may accept a wage 1,000 times less per year than you would, therefore you would be able to reap from his/her misfortunate situation and all the other laborers as well who have agreed with your philosophy.] You could call this your great pyramid.
You at the top and the most intellectually challenged laboring at the bottom. You could find a place for the reader in the middle if he/she would like to go to college and learn old and new technologies.

You could even [tithe] pay the churches to preach your philosophy along with mythology that the people are so desperately wanting to hear:rules:

The priests can be your informants that can let you know of any type of paradigm shift that might be taking place so that you will know how to respond and use it towards your advantage to make even more wealth for yourself.:detective:

Now lets just say that your mother or father or the one who is close to your heart just happens to be intellectually challenged or environmentally challenged. Would you give them a break? or would you say sorry mom and dad it is just tough love.
 
reasoning logic
 
Reply Tue 23 Feb, 2010 08:27 pm
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic;128061 wrote:
Paradigm shifts within ethics suffer violence and all of us use violence to stop the progression of these shifts.......This statement sounds provocative perhaps..... I have no answers but I do have many questions In the field of ethics that I hope many will reply to....... As I have wandered threw history with my blindfold of ignorance on I have stumbled upon many things that I wonder about, hoping that you great thinkers will be able to address........ I will not go all the way back in history to the point of inception but rather I will start with Socrates who most of you should know, so there is no need to explain but instead I will move forward to Plato who traveled to Egypt which all of you should know as well, I will then move to Philo who also lived in Egypt who wrote about the Therapeutae.:detective: Philo writes that they were philosophers that claimed they were able to heal the souls or the minds of the people. What do you suppose the therapeutae thought would create a paradigm shift in another person's mind, that would make him/her think differently than what was thought ethical at first? ....That task would seem impossible, By just looking at one defect in philosophy that seems to be shared among most of us OCPD. Well maybe not the full blown disease but it sure does seem that many among us have some traits of OCPD at times. If you disagree just ask your spouse. I will now fall off a cliff that I did not see. This is what the Christians may be thinking of me from this point forward.:devilish: Religion has been used by humans for what ever reason man thinks it needs to be used. Man is not perfect and even if he believes that he has been inspired by god it does not mean for certain that he has..... Our minds have illusions at times.... If you do not know what I mean do a research on the different illusions that the mind can have... There are some examples that are very easy to understand and some so complex that we do not understand them completely as yet....... Baptism seems to have been a tradition even before the Christians. The Jews were known for cleansing themselves from defiled things before they entered into the temple. It seems that a greater importance was given to the cleaning of the outside of things rather than the inside of things. Getting to the point of these questions may seem to be provocative but here goes......Changing water into wine? These healers of the mind, "did they think that the idea of baptizing with water should be changed into something different? Maybe something that would make people behave in a different way, like maybe the way alcohol is able to change the mood of the mind. Something like ABC fine wine and spirits?:drinking: Spirits? Maybe not that type of spirit but even something more different than that. Remember these were philosophers and as we all know great philosophers can be very creative thinkers. How about a holly spirit, one that is all truth, logic and ethical? Could you imagine a person that when taught reason, logic and ethics by forms of parables and fables?.... Having this new wisdom, Being able to hear and understand the words of wisdom being spoken to him, where as before he was deafly ignorant and not able to hear or make sense of them. He is now able to see the way that he should behave where as before he was as blind as I am walking with this blindfold of ignorance stumbling threw life as if he were crippled as if he were spiritually dead. The unexamined life is not worth living. Did the therapeutae believe that man was spiritually dead? ... Could they have viewed this transformation as if they made the blind see, the deaf hear, the crippled to walk and resurrected the spiritualy dead, and so on and so on?.......If you learned ethics and thought that you were just as important as anyone else and that you should not be pushed around nor should you push others around. With this new knowledge of right and wrong and with you sharing it with everyone around. It may have seemed to be a very big threat to the ruling power.... Everyone may start to view some of ruler's ways to be wrong......If you keep spreading truth of ethics around and large numbers of people start to follow you, the rulers may see you as a threat and have you punished or even terminated.......It would be very hard for one who gains wealth directly or indirectly by unethical means to allow a paradigm shift in ethics to take hold. Anyone who has a general knowledge of neuroscience and biology should be well aware that there will never be a perfect utopia, But could it be possible for every family to be more advanced in all areas of interest if mankind were more tuned with true ethics? ...What are true ethics? ...Well maybe we can not know, but could we be better off than what we are now if We spent more time in this field? Or would this bring greater division?.... Thanks for any comments or corrections. You will not hurt my feelings. have I wandered far from logic?

I just wanted to touch bases on the term OCPD. If you are interested you can type these 2 {OCPD philosophy} into a search to see my point of view.
 
Jackofalltrades phil
 
Reply Tue 23 Feb, 2010 11:35 pm
@reasoning logic,
I went through the OCPD thing, but i am unable to understand the link between OCPD syndromes and paradigm shifts in Ethics.

Although i would like read but am unable to go through deepthots book on ethics. I hope to discuss that with deepthot soon.
 
reasoning logic
 
Reply Wed 24 Feb, 2010 05:42 pm
@Jackofalltrades phil,
Jackofalltrades;131725 wrote:
I went through the OCPD thing, but i am unable to understand the link between OCPD syndromes and paradigm shifts in Ethics.

Although i would like read but am unable to go through deepthots book on ethics. I hope to discuss that with deepthot soon.


This is my view point and is not 100% fact.
I have not met all of the people who have OCPD, But I can tell you from my first hand experience and research work that they can be very book smart. They are good people that have problems just like the rest of us.
It seems that they all have one thing in common and that is they think that they have the ultimate knowledge and and absolute truth about what ever they are talking about.[ There is no grey area only black and white]
There is no need to question their self in any way. Other peoples view points are not valued as they are not open minded.

Personal Paradigm shifts come by new info added to the box and questioning the box with any new info that has been added.
Just by questioning ideas or so called facts in the box alone can some times give you a different view about the way you view things.
This does not mean to me that a person with OCPD can not have a Paradigm shift it only means that they are hindered and may have fewer.

Reasoning Self Logic
 
Jackofalltrades phil
 
Reply Thu 25 Feb, 2010 04:21 am
@reasoning logic,
Hey....... man!

R U. by any chance out of a million moons, suggesting that I have an OCPD problem.????.............. i.e, I just got an inkling.

my my my........... LOL!!!!!!!!..............
 
reasoning logic
 
Reply Thu 25 Feb, 2010 06:03 pm
@Jackofalltrades phil,
Jackofalltrades;132253 wrote:
Hey....... man!

R U. by any chance out of a million moons, suggesting that I have an OCPD problem.????.............. i.e, I just got an inkling.

my my my........... LOL!!!!!!!!..............
No I do not think that you have OCPD and I hope that readers do not take it the wrong way. I only used it as one example of how our minds can be illogical at times.
We all seem to have traits of OCPD! Remember when you were a teenager and Knew everything? Well I am sure that we did not loose all of that type of thinking. Some of it contiues with us today.:bigsmile:
 
Jackofalltrades phil
 
Reply Fri 26 Feb, 2010 01:46 pm
@reasoning logic,
Oh thanks for generalising it....... you saved me an embarassment.

But yes, i agree with you when you say we all have traits of OCPD....... ......

And ........ we all need to be illogical at times, if we were not we would not have such a good human world...... We have our idiosyncracies, strangeness, emotionalness, love, sexual libidos...... hard rock, olympics, soccur world cup, wildlife photography, making a beeline to Mt Everest and its crumbling peak, building 100 storeyed buildings, ....... yes we all are illogical at times..... and i think i like it that way.

What i dont like about the illogicals are things like war, cunningness, power politics , eating tigers bone as an aphrodisiac and keeping our electrical appliances on stand-by mode all the time.
 
reasoning logic
 
Reply Sat 27 Feb, 2010 08:39 am
@Jackofalltrades phil,
Jackofalltrades;132920 wrote:
Oh thanks for generalising it....... you saved me an embarassment.

But yes, i agree with you when you say we all have traits of OCPD....... ......

And ........ we all need to be illogical at times, if we were not we would not have such a good human world...... We have our idiosyncracies, strangeness, emotionalness, love, sexual libidos...... hard rock, olympics, soccur world cup, wildlife photography, making a beeline to Mt Everest and its crumbling peak, building 100 storeyed buildings, ....... yes we all are illogical at times..... and i think i like it that way.

What i dont like about the illogicals are things like war, cunningness, power politics , eating tigers bone as an aphrodisiac and keeping our electrical appliances on stand-by mode all the time.


I think that you have a very good point of view that all others should consider. Smile
 
deepthot
 
Reply Sat 27 Feb, 2010 04:36 pm
@Jackofalltrades phil,
Jackofalltrades;132920 wrote:
Oh thanks for generalising it....... you saved me an embarassment. ......What i dont like about the illogicals are things like war, cunningness, power politics , eating tigers bone as an aphrodisiac and keeping our electrical appliances on stand-by mode all the time.


Hello Jack,

It seems you got a little paranoid there for a bit, taking personally what reasoned was obsessed with - excuse me; concerned about - because his best buddie has that condition.

I see we have something in common! I share the same dislikes as those you list. Yes those activities you dislike ARE ILLOGICAL. If the perpetrators were asked to present the logic behind their activities, their "reasonin"g would eventually lead to (an ethical) fallacy. We would hear some twisted logic.

You write: "Although i would like read but am unable to go through deepthots book on ethics. I hope to discuss that with deepthot soon."

What did you mean by that? Why exactly are you "unable" to study a document? And did you mean you hope to discuss the content of the essay soon? Or were you saying you hope to discuss why you tell yourself you are 'unable' soon? Please be so kind as to explain.

p.s. I wrote five books on ethics. I assume you mean the latest, the one entitled A Unified Theory of Ethics. The two preceding are prerequisite in the sense that they contain material good to have as background for the current booklet. They are entitled Living The Good Life; and ETHICS: A College Course. Have you scanned them already?
 
Jackofalltrades phil
 
Reply Sat 27 Feb, 2010 08:58 pm
@deepthot,
deepthot;133357 wrote:
Please be so kind as to explain.

p.s. I wrote five books on ethics. I assume you mean the latest, the one entitled A Unified Theory of Ethics. The two preceding are prerequisite in the sense that they contain material good to have as background for the current booklet. They are entitled Living The Good Life; and ETHICS: A College Course. Have you scanned them already?



The inability comes from the unableness to read what you have written. I read the AUTOEthics till about 12 pages..... where the discussion had reached to 'conscience'........ This faculty or trait of mind is very often invoked, and frankly i have not studied it deeply, even though it often crosses my thoughts on ethical issues. The Qs typically, what is 'conscience'..... why it has a role in intellectual life, did Hitler had a 'conscience' , and so on and so forth.

And you reminding me of my promise, is a bit harsh:lol:, and i am finding less time to read, as i am engrossed in another book, which i read two or three pages a day.........pretty awful for 'progress'.

I am also studying how environmental ethics can pervade into a new paradigm shift in ethical behaviour of man....... i had anticipated and hoped that all ethical theories should now turn attention to environmental and energy related or show sensitivity towards eco-friendly human behaviour.

The moral code of conduct should now include the issue of how humans deals with our unique resources on which modern man has become more and more dependent.
 
reasoning logic
 
Reply Sat 27 Feb, 2010 09:22 pm
@Jackofalltrades phil,
Jackofalltrades;133435 wrote:
The inability comes from the unableness to read what you have written. I read the AUTOEthics till about 12 pages..... where the discussion had reached to 'conscience'........ This faculty or trait of mind is very often invoked, and frankly i have not studied it deeply, even though it often crosses my thoughts on ethical issues. The Qs typically, what is 'conscience'..... why it has a role in intellectual life, did Hitler had a 'conscience' , and so on and so forth.

And you reminding me of my promise, is a bit harsh:lol:, and i am finding less time to read, as i am engrossed in another book, which i read two or three pages a day.........pretty awful for 'progress'.

I am also studying how environmental ethics can pervade into a new paradigm shift in ethical behaviour of man....... i had anticipated and hoped that all ethical theories should now turn attention to environmental and energy related or show sensitivity towards eco-friendly human behaviour.

The moral code of conduct should now include the issue of how humans deals with our unique resources on which modern man has become more and more dependent.


You quote [I am also studying how environmental ethics can pervade into a new paradigm shift in ethical behaviour of man....... i had anticipated and hoped that all ethical theories should now turn attention to environmental and energy related or show sensitivity towards eco-friendly human behaviour.

The moral code of conduct should now include the issue of how humans deals with our unique resources on which modern man has become more and more dependent]
Could you please give a example of this? It seems that we may have the same interest but 2 different approaches. Do you have a link that I can follow to see what you mean?Smile
 
deepthot
 
Reply Sun 28 Feb, 2010 02:12 am
@reasoning logic,
Jackofalltrades

You write:" I read the AUTOEthics till about 12 pages." What is "the AUTOethics"??
I readily acknowledge that I am not a great writer, and that many, many other are better writers than I. My stuff does not take up the issues of environmental ethics. I would consider it a feat to get people to the consciousness where they begin to care about our environment.

I took courses in Ecology in 1956. When I had been teaching Philosophy for a year, I was invited by a colleague to attend an Ecology Conference held on the shore of the Connecticut River. That was in 1968. Some of us were aware of how vital it is to keep nature friendly to the presence of plant and animal llife - including the human animal - way back then. Since then countless resources have been depleted and many species have needlessly become extinct. Much that contributed to the sustainability of planet, Earth has been damaged or lost. We are paying for it now with the phenomena we call Climate Change. It may still not be too late to prevent the extinction of the human species, but we are racing to self-destruction. In my books the attempt is to raise consciousness as you can tell once they are read over.

....First we have to care. ....care enough to even plough through the 29 pages (double-sided pages.) It's about the size of a comic book. If I didn't use a large font - for increased readability - it would even be a smaller tract. With type Size 10 it may even take up 12-15 pages. Is that a lot to ask of a philosopher, or of a philosophy student? 1cellofmany said he skipped ahead to The Trolley Di8lemma Revisited because he had a special interest in that issue. He told me later he thoroughly agreed with my conclusions there. Some readers told me the best parts were toward the end of the booklet. What prevented you from skipping ahead - if you were bored with the topic of 'the conscience.'?
 
Jackofalltrades phil
 
Reply Sun 28 Feb, 2010 06:50 am
@reasoning logic,
hello sir

I am glad to hear about you. I am a conservation(act)ivist. I will certainly go thru the pages. No, i was not bored by the topic on conscience, in fact as i hinted it is a persistent thought.

The other genuine excuse i have is that i do not want to deviate from the topic of the thread, and only if the original OP allows such an deviation.

Ps: The abbrev. was refrering to your e-book for which you had given the link in this thread - A Unified theory of Ethics.
 
reasoning logic
 
Reply Sun 28 Feb, 2010 08:28 am
@Jackofalltrades phil,
Jackofalltrades;133528 wrote:
hello sir

I am glad to hear about you. I am a conservation(act)ivist. I will certainly go thru the pages. No, i was not bored by the topic on conscience, in fact as i hinted it is a persistent thought.

The other genuine excuse i have is that i do not want to deviate from the topic of the thread, and only if the original OP allows such an deviation.

Ps: The abbrev. was refrering to your e-book for which you had given the link in this thread - A Unified theory of Ethics.


I do have to admit you had me confuesed on [autoethics] I thought that you may have been referring to car sales ethics. LOL I can see how easy it can be for all of us to jump to conclusions. :poke-eye: Please feel free to talk about any thing about ethics in this post as this is how we see different points of views other than our own. I do not think that wandering away from the topic has been done.
The topic is ethics to me and it is not like anyone is talking about a football game or something that far of the subject. Smile

The abbrev. was refrering to your e-book for which you had given the link in this thread - A Unified theory of Ethics.



---------- Post added 02-28-2010 at 09:58 AM ----------

groundedspirit;130748 wrote:
Excellent questions.

In question #1 it seems we would eventually come down to a debate about what constitutes a state of "being alive" and what responsibility/respect is (morally) due something that is "alive". Because other than that, one could look at a human as nothing more than a functional combination of atoms (matter) no different than steel & silicon (a robot for example). To do otherwise will force us to place special value on the concept of "alive" beyond such a combination of matter.

In question #2 it seems we would end up in a place of discussion of the role of "happiness" within a human and our own views we hold regarding the morality of 'manipulation' of a living thing for the benefit of other than that thing. This question of course is a question of the morality of our current mode of operation in the world as exactly this is, and has been, taking place for thousands of years.
By "convince" you are implying that their state would be one of contentment & happiness which in some circles is considered the epitome of the human condition.

But both of these questions bring into question a living entity's ability to think, reason & question. As long as that ability is present it seems any state of happiness & contentment will be beyond reach and therefore both questions will eventually fall to a state of 'immorality' if we accept that a some point both examples of people will grow beyond the boundaries we have chosen to impose on them, at which point we will be responsibile for their state of unhappiness and ensuing violence.

GS
I do think that this reply should have been seen as great knowledge to be deeply considered. Does anyone disagree? If so please explain. Smile
 
Jackofalltrades phil
 
Reply Mon 1 Mar, 2010 01:15 am
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic;133542 wrote:
I do have to admit you had me confuesed on [autoethics] I thought that you may have been referring to car sales ethics. LOL I can see how easy it can be for all of us to jump to conclusions. :poke-eye:
The abbrev. was refrering to your e-book for which you had given the link in this thread - A Unified theory of Ethics.



Ha ha ha........ i am sorry about that, ... it agains reminds me of how not to rely on short cuts..... i took a lazy way out, and it turned in to a car related sales ethics.......only now i realised after you pointed out the abbrev spelled similar to AUTO......... i had a hearty laugh on this..... not one but even the author could not get it...... i am a bum!

Anyway, thanks for the flexibility, we will keep it within ethics, and hope deepthot keeps a check on us.
 
reasoning logic
 
Reply Mon 1 Mar, 2010 05:25 pm
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic;131608 wrote:
It does apear that there may be many readers that would agree that the botom question would be moraly acceptable. I would like to know if I reworded the question and added your love ones into the picture if the reader might treat their love ones any different than the rest of the people.




Would it be immoral If you are highly intellectual and are able to come up with a scheme that would convince the intellectually challenged to be your work force?

You could hire administrators who would over see all of this, so that you could have more leisure time to come up with other great schemes.
Your administrators would have other people under them analysts, managers and so forth to teach the people that competition and rank are most important.

If you are clever enough the people will demand competition and rank as if it were their divine right, and if you are lucky your philosophy that you teach will seem more important than morality, Which in return would help you to keep the wages of the people low and your personal profits high.

[Meaning that if you could hire the person who is capable of performing a job and is in the most desperate situation caused by his/her environmental or psychological situation that your philosophy helps to create.
he/she may accept a wage 1,000 times less per year than you would, therefore you would be able to reap from his/her misfortunate situation and all the other laborers as well who have agreed with your philosophy.] You could call this your great pyramid.
You at the top and the most intellectually challenged laboring at the bottom. You could find a place for the reader in the middle if he/she would like to go to college and learn old and new technologies.

You could even [tithe] pay the churches to preach your philosophy along with mythology that the people are so desperately wanting to hear:rules:

The priests can be your informants that can let you know of any type of paradigm shift that might be taking place so that you will know how to respond and use it towards your advantage to make even more wealth for yourself.:detective:

Now lets just say that your mother or father or the one who is close to your heart just happens to be intellectually challenged or environmentally challenged. Would you give them a break? or would you say sorry mom and dad it is just tough love.


It does seem that tough love questions are tough to answer as no one has tried to answer the above question. People realy could care less about ethics or their love ones.
Have you noticed how many people on this forum want to be confronted about their immorality? just look at how many replied to this thread. How can we get many different point of views if only a few share their views?
 
Jackofalltrades phil
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 01:14 am
@reasoning logic,
The scenario of your exercise/example, is not so atypical. By which i mean that history has many examples, and the sifting of values after the incident or experiences take splace adds morality as the residual cream of all human experiences.

The protoganist of your example is in all of us. We all try and get the best out of a situation, we exploit our resources includng resources called as 'parents'...... The intelligent, the cunning, the powerful, ........ three braod classifications of human tendencies - have always playeds to their self interest or selfishness.

Today it is no longer the survival of the fittest, it is survival of the educated, intelligent, cunning and powerful forces or groups.

Now, to the tough love issue. Although i am a bit less experienced or educated in the concept of 'love', i do believe it is a kind of selfishness. I may be able to dwelve on that if you can explain what it means by 'tough love'

edit/

ps:I am glad to inform deepthot that i have read upto 35th page of his treatise on A.U.T.O.E......Smile
 
 

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 01:54:52