Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 32

Thread: No such thing as moral or immoral behavior. Only civilized and uncivilized behavior

  1. Top | #21
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,885
    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by no-one-particular View Post
    An objective person is a person with sufficient objectivity to understand that the universe does not revolve around their ego.
    A civilized society is a society whose laws do not revolve around any one person or any one group of people.
    The more a society treats everyone as equals the more civilized it is.

    But treating everyone as equals is not the same thing as treating everyone exactly the same.
    If we treated everyone the way that extroverts want to be treated then people who are introverted would suffer.
    Treating everyone as if they were exactly the same is pseudo-civilization.

    Civilization is an emergent property. It has emerged from the law of the jungle. It is not part of the law of the jungle. It is separate from the law of the jungle. It is beyond the law of the jungle. It is above the law of the jungle. It is something entirely new. Civilization is what separates man from the animals. Humans are (in varying degrees) civilized. Animals are not.


    There are 3 common positions:
    1) The Theist position: There exists a magical and totally selfless being called 'god' that is the source of all morality (godliness) and civilized behavior should be derived from this morality.
    2) The Hyper-empirical position: There is no 'god' therefore there is no morality (godliness) and therefore there is no such thing as civilized behavior (only mob rule) and everyone is free to do whatever they can get away with.
    3) The Rationalist position: Civilization and civilized behavior are emergent properties that arises whenever you have a large number of objective human beings interacting with one another. A civilized society is a society governed by proper laws. Proper laws do not give any one person or any one group of people any special rights. All people have equal rights in a civilized society. Civilized behavior is behavior that respects proper laws, rules, and expectations.


    In the hyper-empirical (autistic) world view, a person is seen as just a "collection of atoms" and since it is not improper to use, abuse, or manipulate atoms to one's own ends it is, therefore, not thought improper to use, abuse, or manipulate people to one's own ends.

    On the face of it, this almost seems reasonable. After all, we are indeed made entirely of atoms (or some other units that can be modeled mathematically). It fails, however, to take into account the emergent phenomena that make a human being so much more than "just atoms". Atoms don't have thoughts, feelings, hopes, dreams, or aspirations but people do. Clearly, being "made of" something (for example atoms) is not the same thing as "being" something.

    Sometimes hyper-empirical people will avoid the phrase "humans are just atoms" and will opt instead for "humans are just animals". Both phrases express the same underlying idea
    The entire concept of what it is to be civilized and what is "proper" (and therefore your entire argument) rest upon subjective moral positions. If morality did not exist, then civilization would not exist. "Objective morality" (a nonsensical concept) does not exist, because morality refers to what some minds subjectively prefer. However, those subjective states of preference do objectively exist. A civilization is what emerges when people agree to abide by a set of rules based in some set of shared or agreed upon preferences for how things should be.

  2. Top | #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    california
    Posts
    168
    Rep Power
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    The entire concept of what it is to be civilized and what is "proper" (and therefore your entire argument) rest upon subjective moral positions. If morality did not exist, then civilization would not exist. "Objective morality" (a nonsensical concept) does not exist, because morality refers to what some minds subjectively prefer. However, those subjective states of preference do objectively exist. A civilization is what emerges when people agree to abide by a set of rules based in some set of shared or agreed upon preferences for how things should be.
    A civilized society is a society whose laws do not revolve around any one person or any one group of people.
    The more a society treats everyone as equals the more civilized it is.
    (Equal rights. Equal protection. Equal pay for equal work. Equal punishment for equal crimes.)

    But treating everyone as equals is not the same thing as treating everyone exactly the same.
    If we treated everyone the way that extroverts want to be treated then people who are introverted would suffer.
    Treating everyone as if they were exactly the same is pseudo-civilization
    Teachers = Trees of knowledge
    Fruit is free
    Will you eat or are you afraid it will bite you?

  3. Top | #23
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,885
    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by no-one-particular View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    The entire concept of what it is to be civilized and what is "proper" (and therefore your entire argument) rest upon subjective moral positions. If morality did not exist, then civilization would not exist. "Objective morality" (a nonsensical concept) does not exist, because morality refers to what some minds subjectively prefer. However, those subjective states of preference do objectively exist. A civilization is what emerges when people agree to abide by a set of rules based in some set of shared or agreed upon preferences for how things should be.
    A civilized society is a society whose laws do not revolve around any one person or any one group of people.
    The more a society treats everyone as equals the more civilized it is.
    (Equal rights. Equal protection. Equal pay for equal work. Equal punishment for equal crimes.)

    But treating everyone as equals is not the same thing as treating everyone exactly the same.
    If we treated everyone the way that extroverts want to be treated then people who are introverted would suffer.
    Treating everyone as if they were exactly the same is pseudo-civilization
    Yeah, I read that when you wrote it the first time, and it rests entirely upon your subjective moral preferences that you are using to decide what it means to be "civilized" and that being civilized is "proper".

  4. Top | #24
    Super Moderator Bronzeage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    6,750
    Archived
    7,568
    Total Posts
    14,318
    Rep Power
    40
    The fundamental flaw in almost all discussions of morality is basing arguments on the idea that morality exists to benefit the individual.

    Morality and moral codes exist to protect the group. The means the wants and needs of any individual are subservient to that of the group. Moral judgment is group judgment, and as such, whatever religious or secular power that exists will be seen as the enforcer of the moral code.

    None of this has anything to do with being nice to one another.

  5. Top | #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    california
    Posts
    168
    Rep Power
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by Bronzeage View Post
    Morality and moral codes exist to protect the group.
    Civilization and civilized laws exist to protect the group (and the individuals within the group). There is no such thing as 'moral'.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by no-one-particular View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    The entire concept of what it is to be civilized and what is "proper" (and therefore your entire argument) rest upon subjective moral positions. If morality did not exist, then civilization would not exist. "Objective morality" (a nonsensical concept) does not exist, because morality refers to what some minds subjectively prefer. However, those subjective states of preference do objectively exist. A civilization is what emerges when people agree to abide by a set of rules based in some set of shared or agreed upon preferences for how things should be.
    A civilized society is a society whose laws do not revolve around any one person or any one group of people.
    The more a society treats everyone as equals the more civilized it is.
    (Equal rights. Equal protection. Equal pay for equal work. Equal punishment for equal crimes.)

    But treating everyone as equals is not the same thing as treating everyone exactly the same.
    If we treated everyone the way that extroverts want to be treated then people who are introverted would suffer.
    Treating everyone as if they were exactly the same is pseudo-civilization
    Yeah, I read that when you wrote it the first time, and it rests entirely upon your subjective moral preferences that you are using to decide what it means to be "civilized" and that being civilized is "proper".
    My moral preferences? I just said that there is no such thing as 'moral' or 'immoral' behavior.
    Teachers = Trees of knowledge
    Fruit is free
    Will you eat or are you afraid it will bite you?

  6. Top | #26
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,885
    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by no-one-particular View Post

    Civilization and civilized laws exist to protect the group (and the individuals within the group). There is no such thing as 'moral'.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by no-one-particular View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    The entire concept of what it is to be civilized and what is "proper" (and therefore your entire argument) rest upon subjective moral positions. If morality did not exist, then civilization would not exist. "Objective morality" (a nonsensical concept) does not exist, because morality refers to what some minds subjectively prefer. However, those subjective states of preference do objectively exist. A civilization is what emerges when people agree to abide by a set of rules based in some set of shared or agreed upon preferences for how things should be.
    A civilized society is a society whose laws do not revolve around any one person or any one group of people.
    The more a society treats everyone as equals the more civilized it is.
    (Equal rights. Equal protection. Equal pay for equal work. Equal punishment for equal crimes.)

    But treating everyone as equals is not the same thing as treating everyone exactly the same.
    If we treated everyone the way that extroverts want to be treated then people who are introverted would suffer.
    Treating everyone as if they were exactly the same is pseudo-civilization
    Yeah, I read that when you wrote it the first time, and it rests entirely upon your subjective moral preferences that you are using to decide what it means to be "civilized" and that being civilized is "proper".
    My moral preferences? I just said that there is no such thing as 'moral' or 'immoral' behavior.
    Yes, and then you stated your personal moral preferences, which exposes the logical inconsistency in your argument. The very concept of what is "proper" is a moral stance. The very concepts of "proper" and "civilized" are moral judgments. There is no objective basis for either. Both refer to how you think people should act to achieve some goal that you prefer. That is morality.

  7. Top | #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    california
    Posts
    168
    Rep Power
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    Yes, and then you stated your personal moral preferences, which exposes the logical inconsistency in your argument. The very concept of what is "proper" is a moral stance. The very concepts of "proper" and "civilized" are moral judgments. There is no objective basis for either. Both refer to how you think people should act to achieve some goal that you prefer. That is morality.
    Proper might not be the right word. Maybe 'legitimate' would have been better.
    'Civilized' is not a moral judgement. I gave the exact definition above. There is nothing subjective about the definition I gave.
    Teachers = Trees of knowledge
    Fruit is free
    Will you eat or are you afraid it will bite you?

  8. Top | #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    california
    Posts
    168
    Rep Power
    20
    The Rationalist position: Civilization and civilized behavior are emergent properties that arises whenever you have a large number of objective human beings interacting with one another. A civilized society is a society governed by civilized laws. Civilized laws do not give any one person or any one group of people any special rights. All people have equal rights in a civilized society. Civilized behavior is behavior that respects civilized laws, rules, and expectations.

    (Equal rights. Equal protection. Equal pay for equal work. Equal punishment for equal crimes.)
    Teachers = Trees of knowledge
    Fruit is free
    Will you eat or are you afraid it will bite you?

  9. Top | #29
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,885
    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by no-one-particular View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    Yes, and then you stated your personal moral preferences, which exposes the logical inconsistency in your argument. The very concept of what is "proper" is a moral stance. The very concepts of "proper" and "civilized" are moral judgments. There is no objective basis for either. Both refer to how you think people should act to achieve some goal that you prefer. That is morality.
    Proper might not be the right word. Maybe 'legitimate' would have been better.
    'Civilized' is not a moral judgement. I gave the exact definition above. There is nothing subjective about the definition I gave.
    Legitimate is still a moral judgment. The only objective judgments are those involving what does or does not exist. Any positive or negative evaluation of things that exists or assertions that some ideal state is what ought to exist is a moral judgment.
    The definition you gave refers to only one type of society, and possibly only to a hypothetical idealized one. Are you claiming this is the only type of society? If not, then you must be claiming either that this is the preferred type of society or the only one worthy of being called "civilized", both of which are subjective moral judgments. The simple notion that civilization is a good thing is a moral judgment and there inherent moral judgments in the standard definitions of the word civilized:
    OED: polite, courteous, well mannered, good mannered, civil, decorous, gentlemanly, ladylike, gracious

  10. Top | #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    california
    Posts
    168
    Rep Power
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by no-one-particular View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    Yes, and then you stated your personal moral preferences, which exposes the logical inconsistency in your argument. The very concept of what is "proper" is a moral stance. The very concepts of "proper" and "civilized" are moral judgments. There is no objective basis for either. Both refer to how you think people should act to achieve some goal that you prefer. That is morality.
    Proper might not be the right word. Maybe 'legitimate' would have been better.
    'Civilized' is not a moral judgement. I gave the exact definition above. There is nothing subjective about the definition I gave.
    Legitimate is still a moral judgment. The only objective judgments are those involving what does or does not exist. Any positive or negative evaluation of things that exists or assertions that some ideal state is what ought to exist is a moral judgment.
    The definition you gave refers to only one type of society, and possibly only to a hypothetical idealized one. Are you claiming this is the only type of society? If not, then you must be claiming either that this is the preferred type of society or the only one worthy of being called "civilized", both of which are subjective moral judgments. The simple notion that civilization is a good thing is a moral judgment and there inherent moral judgments in the standard definitions of the word civilized:
    OED: polite, courteous, well mannered, good mannered, civil, decorous, gentlemanly, ladylike, gracious
    As I said:

    The Rationalist position: Civilization and civilized behavior are emergent properties that arises whenever you have a large number of objective human beings interacting with one another. A civilized society is a society governed by civilized laws. Civilized laws do not give any one person or any one group of people any special rights. All people have equal rights in a civilized society. Civilized behavior is behavior that respects civilized laws, rules, and expectations.

    (Equal rights. Equal protection. Equal pay for equal work. Equal punishment for equal crimes.)
    Teachers = Trees of knowledge
    Fruit is free
    Will you eat or are you afraid it will bite you?

Similar Threads

  1. There is no such thing as moral or immoral
    By no-one-particular in forum General Religion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-25-2019, 01:52 PM
  2. The impossibility of ethical behavior
    By PyramidHead in forum Morals & Principles
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 08-07-2018, 03:30 PM
  3. Gay behavior insults not like Lesbian behavior insults
    By Rhea in forum Miscellaneous Discussions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-14-2016, 09:20 PM
  4. stereotypes about non-religious behavior
    By masterpeastheater in forum Miscellaneous Discussions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-15-2016, 07:07 AM
  5. Racial Behavior
    By Rhea in forum Morals & Principles
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 05-04-2015, 06:48 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •