Magic: Who thinks they can do it, and why otherwise intelligent people buy it.

[Shai Hulud]

Morality: a system of values regarding right and wrong.

I have a moral system, others have different ones.

Now you're just being glib.  I didn't ask for a definition, saying that morality is a system of right and wrong is tautological.  You say that you don't believe in objective morality, but subjective morality is no different from taste.  You say "I have a moral system, others have different ones."  Are they all equally valid?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Morality: a system of values regarding right and wrong.

I have a moral system, others have different ones.

Now you're just being glib.  I didn't ask for a definition, saying that morality is a system of right and wrong is tautological.  You say that you don't believe in objective morality, but subjective morality is no different from taste.  You say "I have a moral system, others have different ones."  Are they all equally valid?

No.  Mine is more valid.

See how that works?

[Shai Hulud]

No.  Mine is more valid.

See how that works?

I hate to facepalm twice in one thread but:


[Edit: This is just nihilism.  Sorry, but I don't swing that way.]

[The Good Reverend Roger]

My morals ... mostly have to do with being an absolute shit to almost all humans.

Congratulations on being a roaring success!  You're an inspiration to us lesser mortals:)

Yes, that's part of the job.  When I'm not drowning you or laughing while your corn withers in the fields.

So, again, it's like communism or free market bullshit.  Looks really nice on paper, or while you're sitting around at Starbucks solving the world's problems, but not so good in application.

It's a mistake to think that moral philosophy is limited to sitting around at Starbucks.  There's a guy named Leon Kass who's an ethicist that didn't take the time to listen to your erudite critique of how much of a waste of time moral philosophy is.  And he's also some big muckymuck on some sort of National Bioethics commission, and so he spends his time convincing the president that cloning and stem cell research were too immoral to justify their benefits.  But if we have it the way you seem to want it, the people who actually have decent ideas about morals shouldn't waste their time at Starbucks, so we'll have nobody to stand up when people like Kass fuck things up for all of us.  Is this an unfair assessment?

I haven't seen any decent ideas yet.  Just speculation about ideas and what form they should take.

[Kai]

I'm sensing something....it's yet another BA in Philosophy. How quaint. Armchair insights. More existentialism.

A less edgy rehash of DK.

[The Johnny]

Morality: a system of values regarding right and wrong.

I have a moral system, others have different ones.

Now you're just being glib.  I didn't ask for a definition, saying that morality is a system of right and wrong is tautological.  You say that you don't believe in objective morality, but subjective morality is no different from taste.  You say "I have a moral system, others have different ones."  Are they all equally valid?

taste (countable and uncountable; plural tastes)

  1. One of the sensations produced by the tongue in response to certain chemicals.
  2. (countable and uncountable): A person's implicit set of preferences, especially esthetic, though also culinary, sartorial, etc.

Yes, it is like taste; although from my subjective perspective, a lot of people's "taste" sucks.

[Faust]

Morality: a system of values regarding right and wrong.

I have a moral system, others have different ones.

Now you're just being glib.  I didn't ask for a definition, saying that morality is a system of right and wrong is tautological.  You say that you don't believe in objective morality, but subjective morality is no different from taste.  You say "I have a moral system, others have different ones."  Are they all equally valid?

No.  Mine is more valid.

See how that works?

So the conflict between peoples moral system can have a positive outcome on one person and a negative on the other. As soon as notions of power play or the realization that we are all trapped in a fish bowel, ideas of all morality being equal get thrown out the window.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

No.  Mine is more valid.

See how that works?

I hate to facepalm twice in one thread but:


[Edit: This is just nihilism.  Sorry, but I don't swing that way.]

Not unless my belief system is based on nihilism.  It's actually just snobbery and an inability to trust humans with anything more complex than string.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Morality: a system of values regarding right and wrong.

I have a moral system, others have different ones.

Now you're just being glib.  I didn't ask for a definition, saying that morality is a system of right and wrong is tautological.  You say that you don't believe in objective morality, but subjective morality is no different from taste.  You say "I have a moral system, others have different ones."  Are they all equally valid?

No.  Mine is more valid.

See how that works?

So the conflict between peoples moral system can have an outcome a positive outcome on one and a negative on the other. As soon as notions of power play or the realization that we are all trapped in a fish bowel, ideas of all morality being equal get thrown out the window.

As the Judge once told me, back in the bad old days, "Wrong is poor and weak; Right is rich and powerful."

[Shai Hulud]

I'm sensing something....it's yet another BA in Philosophy. How quaint. Armchair insights. More existentialism.

A less edgy rehash of DK.

Easy pal.  Can't a guy just be a philosophy enthusiast without being accused of being a philosophy major?  I have a real degree thanks very much, not a philosophy BA!

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I'm sensing something....it's yet another BA in Philosophy. How quaint. Armchair insights. More existentialism.

A less edgy rehash of DK.

But at least you don't have to take any math, right?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I'm sensing something....it's yet another BA in Philosophy. How quaint. Armchair insights. More existentialism.

A less edgy rehash of DK.

Easy pal.  Can't a guy just be a philosophy enthusiast without being accused of being a philosophy major?  I have a real degree thanks very much, not a philosophy BA!

How does one get enthusiastic about philosophy?

It's about as exciting as stamp collecting.

[The Johnny]

No.  Mine is more valid.

See how that works?

I hate to facepalm twice in one thread but:


[Edit: This is just nihilism.  Sorry, but I don't swing that way.]

How can one be self-centered and a nihilist at the same time?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

No.  Mine is more valid.

See how that works?

I hate to facepalm twice in one thread but:


[Edit: This is just nihilism.  Sorry, but I don't swing that way.]

How can one be self-centered and a nihilist at the same time?

I am neither.  As a Mexica Rain God, the normal rules do not apply to me.

[Faust]

Morality: a system of values regarding right and wrong.

I have a moral system, others have different ones.

Now you're just being glib.  I didn't ask for a definition, saying that morality is a system of right and wrong is tautological.  You say that you don't believe in objective morality, but subjective morality is no different from taste.  You say "I have a moral system, others have different ones."  Are they all equally valid?

No.  Mine is more valid.

See how that works?

So the conflict between peoples moral system can have an outcome a positive outcome on one and a negative on the other. As soon as notions of power play or the realization that we are all trapped in a fish bowel, ideas of all morality being equal get thrown out the window.

As the Judge once told me, back in the bad old days, "Wrong is poor and weak; Right is rich and powerful."

Whenever I see these discussions the power play of morality is always ignored, and its probably the most important part because it is the reality and the actualization of morality.
Its shaking the shit out of it and seeing does it still work afterward.