Mescalhead
Vincebus Eruptum
No comprehendes.
Good vs Evil - What does it mean?
- Thread starter Margim
- Start date
newfangle
hates you.
Originally posted by Pontiuth Pilate
We don't disagree about the end product, just the method. You seem to think there's a right/wrong independent of human consciousness. I think that's bollocks
Like I said to mescal, penises don't turn into hippos, no matter how hard you look. Deal with it.
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
Morals are not concrete objects.
Non sequitur, my Canadian pal
Non sequitur, my Canadian pal
newfangle
hates you.
I think we need to have a talk about concept formation.
Mescalhead
Vincebus Eruptum
Go ahead I'm listening.
newfangle
hates you.
Its unrelated to this subject, and there's no fudgingg chance in hell I'm doing it this late at night.
Sarevok
Civ3 Scenario Creator
hehe, sometimes being evil is a good thing. 
Mescalhead
Vincebus Eruptum
PM me with your concept formation. Explain the difference between a hippo and a John Thomas, since I only have a hippo in my pants.
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
Don't tell me you're a Platonist 
Ideas do not exist outside of the human brain, we agree? If so, then any idea is only as good as its source. We create our own reality. What I find to be good [by using the Rule of Universality to test it for ME] IS good for ME.
Everyone will have their own separate idea of good. And all sane people will have quite a lot of common ground - no murdering, no lying, no stealing, and so on.
Insane people have their own idea of what constitutes good and evil. That morality IS valid - for THEM. That does NOT mean society has to RESPECT their own personal morality, if it hurts others who don't share the same ideas.
I am NOT advocating anarchism, Sade-ism, or any other figurehead of what you mistakenly label "moral relativism", so please don't pigeonhole me with them.
As you may have recognize, I mix my morality equal parts Kant, Locke, and Jefferson
Ideas do not exist outside of the human brain, we agree? If so, then any idea is only as good as its source. We create our own reality. What I find to be good [by using the Rule of Universality to test it for ME] IS good for ME.
Everyone will have their own separate idea of good. And all sane people will have quite a lot of common ground - no murdering, no lying, no stealing, and so on.
Insane people have their own idea of what constitutes good and evil. That morality IS valid - for THEM. That does NOT mean society has to RESPECT their own personal morality, if it hurts others who don't share the same ideas.
I am NOT advocating anarchism, Sade-ism, or any other figurehead of what you mistakenly label "moral relativism", so please don't pigeonhole me with them.
As you may have recognize, I mix my morality equal parts Kant, Locke, and Jefferson
Mescalhead
Vincebus Eruptum
Ideas may exist outside the human brain, but they are irrelevant to me at this time. That is my view which is subjective. A blind man neither sees a hippo nor a phallus. To him, the difference in appearance is non-existant. That is relative.
It seems being an absolutist and atheist renders people with the difficulty of uncertainty, just like religious folk.
It seems being an absolutist and atheist renders people with the difficulty of uncertainty, just like religious folk.
newfangle
hates you.
Originally posted by Pontiuth Pilate
Don't tell me you're a Platonist
His student, Aristotle, is much more to my liking.
The sentance, "We create our own reality," completely contradicts the rest of that paragraph.
What's good for me is good for me, not because I say so, but because reality does (thats the most circular I could make it).
Which is why my believes completely fit into reality.
Pinko
newfangle
hates you.
I'm not uncertain about anything.
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
The sentance, "We create our own reality," completely contradicts the rest of that paragraph.
Not at all! WE judge what is good and evil for each of US, thus creating our own reality.
By projecting our own prospective morals on the whole world, we're judging each possible act by our personal PREFERENCES, what we'd LIKE to see in the rest of the world. Hence, it's totally subjective.
What's good for me is good for me, not because I say so, but because reality does (thats the most circular I could make it).
No, you misunderstand. I judge what the relative absolute good is, based on MY personal preferences as explained above.
Relative absolute good sounds like a contradiction. It's not. It's my way of saying, "The morals I'D prefer to see in the rest of the world" - in other words, the morals that I decide for myself subjectively that I'd like to have applied universally.
You're really making this altogether too complicated with your incomprehension Perhaps we should continue this debate tomorrow. Anyway, I'm off to bed
Not at all! WE judge what is good and evil for each of US, thus creating our own reality.
By projecting our own prospective morals on the whole world, we're judging each possible act by our personal PREFERENCES, what we'd LIKE to see in the rest of the world. Hence, it's totally subjective.
What's good for me is good for me, not because I say so, but because reality does (thats the most circular I could make it).
No, you misunderstand. I judge what the relative absolute good is, based on MY personal preferences as explained above.
Relative absolute good sounds like a contradiction. It's not. It's my way of saying, "The morals I'D prefer to see in the rest of the world" - in other words, the morals that I decide for myself subjectively that I'd like to have applied universally.
You're really making this altogether too complicated with your incomprehension
Perhaps we should continue this debate tomorrow. Anyway, I'm off to bed 
Mrogreturns
The Ghost Who Posts
Originally posted by Pontiuth Pilate
I mean that if the world was populated by six billion copies of you who all behaved like you. So both, really
Well, killing or stealing are out - as you say. But being imprisoned is also bad- I wouldn't like it done to me and it would certainly be bad all round if it were universally applied. I'm sure any sane person would agree with me, can we add inprisonment to the list of commonsense universal evils?
Jorge
Yo mismo
Good --> the elfs of Tolkien, God
Evil --> Sauron, the Devil
In real life these concepts are plain stupid. People are not good nor evil. There are people who is wrong (under others point of view), people who is selfish or people with a different morality and different scale of values. Bur there are not evil people.
Evil --> Sauron, the Devil
In real life these concepts are plain stupid. People are not good nor evil. There are people who is wrong (under others point of view), people who is selfish or people with a different morality and different scale of values. Bur there are not evil people.
Margim
Footy's back.
Oh. My mistake. Guess it should be humanity apologising to Hitler then, after all that accusation that's been happening over the centuries...
Jorge
Yo mismo
Centuries? What Hitler do you refer to?
He was not evil in my opinion. He wanted the best for his country and his people.
Mario Feldberg
Emperor
Bad = North Korea
Good = pizza
Neutral = North Korean pizza
Easy, eh?
Good = pizza
Neutral = North Korean pizza
Easy, eh?
Akka
Moody old mage.
"good" is acting toward others as you would like them act toward you if you were in their place.
"evil" is the reverse.
Basically, we can say that "good" is a form of internal consistency.
"evil" is the reverse.
Basically, we can say that "good" is a form of internal consistency.
WickedSmurf
pr0
Austin Powers is good.
Dr Evil is... Well... Evil.
Mike Myers is... Hmmm...
Dr Evil is... Well... Evil.
Mike Myers is... Hmmm...
Similar threads
