|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: MillerMiller Date: Jan 19, 2007 12:14
> Given a scenario where a person has two choices, to be moral on the one
> hand, but forced to behave in such a way due to that morality that they
> will NOT survive. Or, to enter into political intrique where innocent
> parties may get hurt, to act in the interest of survival, but to become a
> 'less moral' BEing in so doing.
>
> Be moral, die [or decline].
> or
> Be intellgent, survive, but immoral.
>
> The more I enter into the Shakespearean complexity of human socialability,
> it seems these two choices are continually marking my path and funneling
> me along a maze much like a rat in a lab experiment. Some days, I can be
> moral and accept the abuses that are the result, but that general path
> leads to material depravity. Most days I am 'forced' to defile my
> morality, do things I do not like, but reason is my 'best' option if I
> must steer away from PAIN and survive.
> ...
|
| Show full article (1.95Kb) |
|
| | 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: toolytooly Date: Jan 20, 2007 17:32
>
> I think I recently took your advice here and became an unwilling assassin
> [sort of]. The plague of my existence 'meant' not only the desecration of
> 2 others, but also their wives and children. But it was my own
> desecration that I acted to 'prevent'.
Thought I should clarify before someone thinks I'm an axe murderer or
something...the "desecration" was very symbolic and involved workplace
intrigue is all. Still, to harm another in any way is cause for
reverberation through one's conscience...and one needs not "big numbers" to
ask questions of algebraic consequence.
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: toolytooly Date: Jan 19, 2007 11:48
Given a scenario where a person has two choices, to be moral on the one
hand, but forced to behave in such a way due to that morality that they will
NOT survive. Or, to enter into political intrique where innocent parties
may get hurt, to act in the interest of survival, but to become a 'less
moral' BEing in so doing.
Be moral, die [or decline].
or
Be intellgent, survive, but immoral.
The more I enter into the Shakespearean complexity of human socialability,
it seems these two choices are continually marking my path and funneling me
along a maze much like a rat in a lab experiment. Some days, I can be moral
and accept the abuses that are the result, but that general path leads to
material depravity. Most days I am 'forced' to defile my morality, do
things I do not like, but reason is my 'best' option if I must steer away
from PAIN and survive.
|
| Show full article (1.61Kb) |
| 10 Comments |
|
|
Author: toolytooly Date: Jan 19, 2007 17:29
"Miller" chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:Tzcsh.47$Ou1.37@newsfe04.lga...>> Given a scenario where a person has two choices, to be moral on the one
>> hand, but forced to behave in such a way due to that morality that they
>> will NOT survive. Or, to enter into political intrique where innocent
>> parties may get hurt, to act in the interest of survival, but to become a
>> 'less moral' BEing in so doing.
>>
>> Be moral, die [or decline].
>> or
>> Be intellgent, survive, but immoral.
>>
>> The more I enter into the Shakespearean complexity of human
>> socialability, it seems these two choices are continually marking my path
>> and funneling me along a maze much like a rat in a lab experiment. Some
>> days, I can be moral and accept the abuses that are the result, but that
>> general path leads to material depravity. Most days I am 'forced' to ...
|
| Show full article (2.91Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: toolytooly Date: Jan 19, 2007 17:38
>
> If you really want to enjoy just being, then I suggest you try to drop the
> concept of morality--and survival too, while you are at it. Your
> existential anguish is of your own making.
>
> Scott
>
Yes, yes...read the first post in the thread 'Locke on Essences and
Fetuses'. This is sort of where I am leading in all this...that we ARE A
FABRICATION. Indeed, my angish is of my own making, but it's moral
conclusion is an ascension. I have argued for ages that it is our
CONSCIENCE that defines our human essence and seperates us from the animals.
And...HOMO SAPIENS is, without conscience, no longer human.
But the paradox exists that a moral BEing can act against it's own
survival...and irrationally seek PAIN. But it is not PAIN it chooses, but
greater freedom; to push back the constraints, to rebell against prisons.
This is our glorius SPIRIT...and progenator of ESTEEM. This is our HUMAN
IDENTITY.
|
| Show full article (1.03Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: TruthSlaveTruthSlave Date: Jan 20, 2007 11:54
Miller wrote:
>> Given a scenario where a person has two choices, to be moral on the one
>> hand, but forced to behave in such a way due to that morality that they
>> will NOT survive. Or, to enter into political intrique where innocent
>> parties may get hurt, to act in the interest of survival, but to become a
>> 'less moral' BEing in so doing.
>>
>> Be moral, die [or decline].
>> or
>> Be intellgent, survive, but immoral.
>>
>> The more I enter into the Shakespearean complexity of human socialability,
>> it seems these two choices are continually marking my path and funneling
>> me along a maze much like a rat in a lab experiment. Some days, I can be
>> moral and accept the abuses that are the result, but that general path
>> leads to material depravity. Most days I am 'forced' to defile my
>> morality, do things I do not like, but reason is my 'best' option if I
>> must steer away from PAIN and survive. ...
|
| Show full article (3.76Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: AlanSAlanS Date: Jan 21, 2007 12:44
"tooly" bellsouth.net> wrote:
>Given a scenario where a person has two choices, to be moral on the one
>hand, but forced to behave in such a way due to that morality that they will
>NOT survive.
Forget about morality, selfishness is the prime directive. If you
truly act in your best self interest, morality will follow without the
need of any attention to it. Unfortunately, most of us are unable to
assess our self interests properly. False dichotomy between
selfishness and morality results from shortsighted and improper
evaluations of wherein lies one's best interest.
|
| |
| 2 Comments |
|
|
Author: George DanceGeorge Dance Date: Jan 21, 2007 12:44
tooly wrote:
> Given a scenario where a person has two choices, to be moral on the one
> hand, but forced to behave in such a way due to that morality that they will
> NOT survive. Or, to enter into political intrique where innocent parties
> may get hurt, to act in the interest of survival, but to become a 'less
> moral' BEing in so doing.
>
> Be moral, die [or decline].
> or
> Be intellgent, survive, but immoral.
Rather than look only at the idea of moraity - of 'ought'-style
restrictions on what persons may do - I'd invite you to also consider
the idea of ethics - of 'ought'-style restrictions on what moralities
may tell persons to do.
One important principle is the "Ought implies Can" principle: it cannot
be mandatory to do the impossible. That includes the logically
impossible, of course - a morality cannot tell you to murder and not
murder at the same time - but also the physically impossible - a
morality cannot tell you both to have children and to be celibate.
|
| Show full article (3.46Kb) |
| 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: toolytooly Date: Jan 22, 2007 01:37
"AlanS" nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:4rj7r2t1gosnfct82lkgenv06hfb89152j@4ax.com...> "tooly" bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>Given a scenario where a person has two choices, to be moral on the one
>>hand, but forced to behave in such a way due to that morality that they
>>will
>>NOT survive.
>
> Forget about morality, selfishness is the prime directive. If you
> truly act in your best self interest, morality will follow without the
> need of any attention to it. Unfortunately, most of us are unable to
> assess our self interests properly. False dichotomy between
> selfishness and morality results from shortsighted and improper
> evaluations of wherein lies one's best interest.
>
Ha...you're right again AlanS [at least I agree here...kind of anyway].
Selfishness I have concluded, is at the root of everything we do. We cannot
escape that.
|
| Show full article (4.44Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: toolytooly Date: Jan 22, 2007 02:08
>
> tooly wrote:
>> Given a scenario where a person has two choices, to be moral on the one
>> hand, but forced to behave in such a way due to that morality that they
>> will
>> NOT survive. Or, to enter into political intrique where innocent parties
>> may get hurt, to act in the interest of survival, but to become a 'less
>> moral' BEing in so doing.
>>
>> Be moral, die [or decline].
>> or
>> Be intellgent, survive, but immoral.
>
> Rather than look only at the idea of moraity - of 'ought'-style
> restrictions on what persons may do - I'd invite you to also consider
> the idea of ethics - of 'ought'-style restrictions on what moralities
> may tell persons to do.
> ...
|
| Show full article (4.46Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
