next »

[ஒழுக்கின்மை]

i'm not sure i understand: you believe that people have an innate will to do good, but that what is "good" is constructed? how can it be constructed and not real if it's innate?

[Seth]

well jesus let me down by saving my soul in a particularly uninspiring and trivial fashion, so it's even. why couldn't the savior of humanity have killed satan with his bare hands after punching his way through the 7 layers of hell to get to him

fuck dude way to ruin the second coming

it was going to be awesome

[Dacke]

Most of us are born with feelings that tell us to be nice in certain ways. Like.. not killing family or hurting kittens. This is the part that I think is innate (if I'm using the word correctly?) as we have such feelings before being taught to have them. From those feelings we extrapolate a concept of "good" and get the motivation to do more of it.

Which gives you a rough explanation of how I believe we get the ethics-ball rolling, from a practical point of view.

[PaleFox]

i'm not sure i understand: you believe that people have an innate will to do good, but that what is "good" is constructed? how can it be constructed and not real if it's innate?

ethically speaking

good would be whatever promotes the continuation and propagation of a species (or all species). As such, environmentalism is "good" because it ensures that the planet will not be harmed, which would be, presumably, bad for the organisms living on it. Similarly, murder and theft are not "good" because they represent the gain of a few at the cost of disproportionate effort of others

unless you argue that those things are good for society (i believe society is good because it promotes stability which is good for the species as a whole)


of course good is not innate it is inherently subjective

[Dacke]

That comment makes it kind of obvious that the use of the word "good" is very unwieldy. My bad for using it in the first place.

But I don't think it makes any sense to talk about "good" from the perspective of evolution or the species. Ethics are relevant to individuals with the ability to experience, not to an abstract concept like species or race (which are inexact categories constructed by humans). 

[ஒழுக்கின்மை]

Most of us are born with feelings that tell us to be nice in certain ways. Like.. not killing family or hurting kittens. This is the part that I think is innate (if I'm using the word correctly?) as we have such feelings before being taught to have them.

i'm not sure this is true -- what evidence supports this? the 'before being taught' is particularly troubling because by the time someone is capable of even knowing what death is and knowing what killing is (let alone capable of such actions) they have been taught a great deal.

besides, it's only rational not to want to kill things that are good for you. it'd make no sense if babies wanted to kill their mothers, for instance -- where else would they get food from? it's purely in people's self-interest not to kill their loved ones or their pets, because they're worth far more to them alive than they are dead. is it really ethics if something is purely in your self-interest? (maybe, but usually people think of ethics in terms of not doing bad to others, not just in doing good for oneself)

another thing is that kids do pull the tails of cats before they are taught otherwise -- if you've ever seen a very young child and a cat you have probably seen them try to pull its tail and someone who knows better warning them not to. so i don't really think that people have an instinct not to harm cats, because so many babies do try to harm cats (even if they don't know that it'll harm them).

[Drum]

i'm not sure i understand: you believe that people have an innate will to do good, but that what is "good" is constructed? how can it be constructed and not real if it's innate?

Will try to interpret, inserting my own POV:  It's the desire to want things to be better (I don't know if I can agree with it being innate cause I'd have to see some evidence), but what 'better' is is not at all clear, and is obviously mutable, factious, frequently contradictory and situational.  That said, there must logically be something that is 'best' (or many things that are best-equal) - but that doesn't mean it's innate, only that it's possible. So it doesn't have to be something that's categorically real, but it can be logically necessary.  Ontology is just kind of dumb in general, and no good has ever come of it.

[phubans]

So now that the theists have been scared out of this thread, the atheists are left to argue semantics among each other?

 

Amusing thread!

[im9today]

So now that the theists have been scared out of this thread, the atheists are left to argue semantics among each other?

 

Amusing thread!

i'm not afraid of anything. except god.

[Drum]

That comment makes it kind of obvious that the use of the word "good" is very unwieldy. My bad for using it in the first place.

But I don't think it makes any sense to talk about "good" from the perspective of evolution or the species. Ethics are relevant to individuals with the ability to experience, not to an abstract concept like species or race (which are inexact categories constructed by humans). 

Swapping in 'best' for 'good' solves a surprising amount of problems and sets you up for some good think combos I have found.

@phubans:  Kill yourself.

[Blademasterbobo]

So now that the Paul Eres joined this thread, the people who don't know any better are trying to argue with him?

 

Amusing thread!

it's funny to me that both pauls are condescending shitbags

[---]

So now that the Paul Eres joined this thread, the people who don't know any better are trying to argue with him?

 

Amusing thread!

it's funny to me that both pauls are condescending shitbags

Anyone else notice the edited quote?

[im9today]

most of the good people that believe in god probably dont stay up during the am hours debating on the internet. they have more important things to do. maybe if you got better sleep your mind would work better and you could think more clearly about these issues.

[Dacke]

Our empathic abilities aren't fully developed until we come out of puberty. Small children are especially incompetent when it comes to being nice.

But yes, I'm talking about instincts that we've gotten from evolution. Like not hurting our children and relatives. I can't remember any specific studies, but I think it has been established that those feeling spill over to bigger groups that to your closest family.

But it doesn't really matter if we get those feelings from biology or culture (I think it's quite a bit of both). As the situation is now, we have those feelings and they motivate us to create ethics.

[Drum]

Our empathic abilities aren't fully developed until we come out of puberty. Small children are especially incompetent when it comes to being nice.

But yes, I'm talking about instincts that we've gotten from evolution. Like not hurting our children and relatives. I can't remember any specific studies, but I think it has been established that those feeling spill over to bigger groups that to your closest family.

But it doesn't really matter if we get those feelings from biology or culture (I think it's quite a bit of both). As the situation is now, we have those feelings and they motivate us to create ethics.

Yeah, but you don't have to stop there - that's just a codified survival strategy, like communism or libertarianism, or whatever Paul Eres believes.  You can keep going, see where the logic takes you, ditch the arbitrary qualifiers.

most of the good people that believe in god probably dont stay up during the am hours debating on the internet. they have more important things to do. maybe if you got better sleep your mind would work better and you could think more clearly about these issues.

Jesus argued with people in temples and marketplaces, which is what they had before the internet.  Don't disrespect.

[im9today]

Our empathic abilities aren't fully developed until we come out of puberty. Small children are especially incompetent when it comes to being nice.

it's called the age of accountability. all of this is already in the bible. if you bothered to actually read the good book you wouldnt need these debates, you would already have all the answers anyone will ever need.

[im9today]

Our empathic abilities aren't fully developed until we come out of puberty. Small children are especially incompetent when it comes to being nice.

But yes, I'm talking about instincts that we've gotten from evolution. Like not hurting our children and relatives. I can't remember any specific studies, but I think it has been established that those feeling spill over to bigger groups that to your closest family.

But it doesn't really matter if we get those feelings from biology or culture (I think it's quite a bit of both). As the situation is now, we have those feelings and they motivate us to create ethics.

Yeah, but you don't have to stop there - that's just a codified survival strategy, like communism or libertarianism, or whatever Paul Eres believes.  You can keep going, see where the logic takes you, ditch the arbitrary qualifiers.

most of the good people that believe in god probably dont stay up during the am hours debating on the internet. they have more important things to do. maybe if you got better sleep your mind would work better and you could think more clearly about these issues.

Jesus argued with people in temples and marketplaces, which is what they had before the internet.  Don't disrespect.

wrong. jesus doesnt argue, he teaches. wise up atheists, before its too late.

[Drum]

Our empathic abilities aren't fully developed until we come out of puberty. Small children are especially incompetent when it comes to being nice.

But yes, I'm talking about instincts that we've gotten from evolution. Like not hurting our children and relatives. I can't remember any specific studies, but I think it has been established that those feeling spill over to bigger groups that to your closest family.

But it doesn't really matter if we get those feelings from biology or culture (I think it's quite a bit of both). As the situation is now, we have those feelings and they motivate us to create ethics.

Yeah, but you don't have to stop there - that's just a codified survival strategy, like communism or libertarianism, or whatever Paul Eres believes.  You can keep going, see where the logic takes you, ditch the arbitrary qualifiers.

most of the good people that believe in god probably dont stay up during the am hours debating on the internet. they have more important things to do. maybe if you got better sleep your mind would work better and you could think more clearly about these issues.

Jesus argued with people in temples and marketplaces, which is what they had before the internet.  Don't disrespect.

wrong. jesus doesnt argue, he teaches. wise up atheists, before its too late.

He didn't get to the squabbling point because everybody except for Jesus in the NT is written as either a convenient chump or foil for his wisdom - they are all either amazed by what he says or stalk away twirling their moustaches screeching about how they'll get him next time.  That is what you get in religious tracts.  A monkey could think of a valid retort for some of the stuff Jesus said to the Pharisees (but a monkey wouldn't because monkeys know those guys were even worse than Christians).

[moi]

that's better phrased, yea, but it still has a similar issue -- some people want to be good more than others do. and even those that do want to do good sometimes want it for varying reasons, some of which aren't good (such as to be admired, or to feel superior to others). there's also the issue of *basing* ethics on a *will to do good* being a bit circular: how do you know what good is without ethics? those people who want to do good would already have to some idea of ethics (of what is good and what is bad) prior to basing ethics on that desire to do good

fo' reals bro

[phubans]

Drum, maybe instead of bleating "HURR DURR KILL YOURSELF" at everyone who you disagree with in your little world of butthurt, you should just fuck off and go back to whatever 4chan shithole you crawled out of.

People like you aren't welcome here, so take your "3-posts-a-day and not even level 1" bullshit and fuck off.

Thanks