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: one_less who wrote (70630)	7/2/2003 4:33:45 AM
From: Solon	Respond to of 82486

"Well, for example I would probably know the distance and location of the supplies according to the map..." You go on to list several other circumstantial matters which you apparently feel are necessary to solving the problem of who to save, if anyone. This demonstrates that there is no "right" answer. You intend to make your decision on the basis of your very subjective analysis and interpretation of data in light of your peculiar thoughts and feelings. It is unlikely that your peculiar thoughts and feelings after these many ruminations would correspond to the Absolute CORRECT moral choice external to any and all human input. Unlikely, indeed. You go on to say that the underlying moral principle is to "have a positive regard for my own well being and the well being of others". In whose opinion? Many people reach the point where they believe suicide is most likely to contribute to their well-being. You, yourself have often stated that death was not a bad thing. But I digress... "The presumption is that survival is in everyone’s best interests" It is generally a self-interest, all right. But whose survival will YOU guarantee by either allowing your daughter to drive to the food in safety, or allowing the stranger to live, or ensuring by your silence that both will die? And if you need to ask 761,000,000 questions before you reach your highly subjective decision, then where do you get the certainty (or even the hope) that you are expressing an absolute moral principle?? After all, another would ask 628,000,000 questions and would arrive at a different act of conduct based on his or her personal feelings, thoughts, and relationships. "Ultimately, I don’t think I can complete this task without being “subjective and opinionated.” We don’t live and operate purely in the realm of ideals. We live in the world and use the realm of ideals as a reference for direction." Well, this is my point. These "ideals" are our individualized "ideals". Yes, concepts may often reflect our values to a more refined extent than we find in the natural world. And concepts may serve us in many wonderful ways. But these concepts are related to a shared language and a similar brain biochemistry. All moral decisions are based on self-interest. The fact that some may value altruism, or self abasement, or anything else at all does not mitigate the interest of self. These are simply values chosen by the self to express the self. "I do not consider death to necessarily be a bad thing any more than I consider someone’s continuity necessarily a good thing. So, that seems to be not as clear of a point between us as you imply." The point is that I accept that it may be a bad thing for you and a good thing for me, or vice versa. But if you insist that morality is external to human thought and feeling, I.E. ABSOLUTE...then you may wish to tell me whether death is good or bad, and you may possibly deign to inform me why it has nothing to do with my subjective and relative memories, thoughts, and personalized values. And you may demonstrate to me that you are not simply communicating to me a relative opinion...but instead--Ultimate Knowledge. "Ah…that explains a lot. You finally went off the deep end. You are probably in cuffs because you went into a temple of some sort, in disguise, and started murdering zealots" Well, I might have been cuffed by a psychopath who broke into my home and murdered my entire family. I might have escaped by tipping a burning candle into a cow or a curtain. An Absolute Moral Principle would not involve either your knowledge or your feeling about the matter. If it DID involve personal thought or feeling, the conduct would be different for every individual--and would thus be anything but Absolute. Instead it IS just as it has always appeared to be in Nature and in humanity: a personal value based on human thought and human feeling.