Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (16336)	6/10/2001 10:13:33 AM
From: Solon	Respond to of 82486

"value judgements based on feeling" Yes, that is putting it succinctly. Morality is a meaningless concept if it does not relate to a feeling person who cares one way or another. The feeling is what informs the value. It is the subjective. The reason is what informs the judgement. It is the objective. Together, reason and feeling are able to combine to further the value of existence. The Pedophile "feels" like abusing a child, according to you that "feeling" informs his reason and therefore it must be alright I have unintentionally mislead you, if I have not made it clear that reason and feeling infuse one another. Our thoughts invest our feeling, and our feelings, in turn, imbue our thoughts. Your quote refers to an individual whose ideas are ugly and unreasonable. His ideas are divorced from rational principles of consideration, rights, and respect. We know there is cruelty in the world. Whether the world is with or without God--we are still discussing the same world. It does little good for you to point out the obvious fact, that not everyone seeks the same goals, or considers the same behaviours as correct. In the aggregate, there is a very significant consensus of opinion as to the behaviours which reasonable and considerate people praise, and as to the actions which they condemn. Your positing of a God does nothing to assist our understanding of unsocial behaviour. People have undergone treatment, counselling, etc. and have changed their behaviour from hurtful to helpful. Thus, it would appear unnecessary to posit either devils or demons as the authors of their behaviour. The history of society, and of science, is concrete proof that behaviour follows thought, and that thought can be instructed. As thinking and feeling become comprehensive and at the same time, more refined--so, too, do the actions of people. So while you laughing at the notion that some Pedophiles are also ministers. All you really have to offer those kid's is that you feel their pain and you would never personally hurt them You appear to have switched from argument to blame. I do not see your point. As a society we offer what we can to meet the needs of those who suffer. I certainly do not have a quick-fix--but I would not give a child pious prayer--when what he or she needed was bread. We were not discussing solutions to the problem of suffering. Nevertheless, did you wish to suggest some? Why didn't you just say no, it would have been much easier. People are not gods. They have separate and subjective points of view. As you may have noticed, they ALL have different opinions. You asked me for my opinion, and I made it clear I was speaking only for myself. I believe that hurting others is always wrong unless it is an act of self defense. The Christian explanation for morality is that it is moral because it said so in a book. The Christian inducement to be moral (i.e. to obey the book), springs from the subjective and self-seeking goals of avoiding Hell and gaining Heaven. This, to me, is a miserable, wretched, and entirely egoistic motive. You will forgive me (of course) if I don't share in the vainglory of your superior moral impulses.