Author Topic: Discordianism and Morality  (Read 22506 times)

LMNO

  • Lubricated and Rabid Lungfish of Impending Sexdoom™
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 62136
  • Internet Fuckweasel of Haunted Pork Dimensions.
    • View Profile
    • Earfatigue Productions: When it has to sound like you give a shit.
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #120 on: December 11, 2008, 02:21:51 pm »
No.

It's like saying that the motherboard of a computer is directly responsible for the WOW software.

The brain structure allows for thought, and it does impose physical limitations on thought, but it doesn't direct what thoughts occur.

Cainad (dec.)

  • Houseplant Supreme
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 10739
  • The Emperor's Hairy Right Hand
    • View Profile
    • Internet Forum Safari
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #121 on: December 11, 2008, 02:25:46 pm »
No.

It's like saying that the motherboard of a computer is directly responsible for the WOW software.

The brain structure allows for thought, and it does impose physical limitations on thought, but it doesn't direct what thoughts occur...

...in many, but not all, cases. I mean, we're pretty hardwired to think fap-inducing thoughts.

(I don't mean to be nitpicky, because I do agree with you, but someone who doesn't will try to call you on that.)

AFK

  • We all
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 33482
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #122 on: December 11, 2008, 02:27:41 pm »
Let me try this again:

I tend to think the ideas of morality and ethics arose in conjunction with the evolution of society, not our brains.  If we were all still living in disparate caves, our nearest neighbors a days journey away, morals and ethics would not be necessary.  They became a necessity once we figured out we are going to be stuck swimming in a vast sea of humanity.  It's the morals and ethics, in part, that allow us to tread that sea and keep us from drowning.  In other words, sometimes you have to be nice to other people in order to make it anywhere in society. 
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

Vene

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 2863
  • Screaming Primate
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #123 on: December 11, 2008, 02:28:55 pm »
So, it could be said that morals come from the evolutionary process.  However, saying it like that implies a much more direct link than is actually there.  I mean, you could take that line of thought and say that Beethoven's Fifth Symphony is a result of evolution; even though you can reason it out, it's essentially a meaningless statement.

Separating any behavior and patterns thereof from the evolutionary process that spawned them seems to be unduly elevating ourselves above the 'base natural order'.  Why is it anything other than a direct link?  (your example of music is an interesting question, when viewed from that angle, and i would imagine full of insight rather than meaningless)  In regards to morality, that would seem even more direct as they set the standards of social interaction for group, and thereby their success, no?
Societal rules have changed at a much faster rate than biological evolution.  At best evolution is one part of many influencing how we make decisions and set up our societies.  We did evolve as social creatures, but to try and apply evolution to say what is and isn't moral is misapplying the theory.

To phrase it another way, evolution can explain why we have rules for dealing with other humans, but it can't tell use what the ideal set of rules are.  If our morals were defined by natural selection it would follow evolutionarily stable stragegies which is a far cry from having objective morality.  I'd also hate to live in a society that gets its morals from such a cold and cruel theory.

LMNO

  • Lubricated and Rabid Lungfish of Impending Sexdoom™
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 62136
  • Internet Fuckweasel of Haunted Pork Dimensions.
    • View Profile
    • Earfatigue Productions: When it has to sound like you give a shit.
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #124 on: December 11, 2008, 02:33:01 pm »
Let me try this again:

I tend to think the ideas of morality and ethics arose in conjunction with the evolution of society, not our brains.  If we were all still living in disparate caves, our nearest neighbors a days journey away, morals and ethics would not be necessary.  They became a necessity once we figured out we are going to be stuck swimming in a vast sea of humanity.  It's the morals and ethics, in part, that allow us to tread that sea and keep us from drowning.  In other words, sometimes you have to be nice to other people in order to make it anywhere in society. 


Yes.

To phrase it another way, evolution can explain why we have rules for dealing with other humans, but it can't tell use what the ideal set of rules are.  

Yes.

Bebek Sincap Ratatosk

  • Probably
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 11430
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #125 on: December 11, 2008, 02:44:39 pm »
Not to mention that I doubt morality would give some humans a reproductive edge over other humans... Social rules, sure... morals I dunno about that.
- I don't see race. I just see cars going around in a circle.

"Back in my day, crazy meant something. Now everyone is crazy" - Charlie Manson

Elder Iptuous

  • Professional Discordian and Physiognomist
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 5667
  • terribly tedious
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #126 on: December 11, 2008, 02:46:16 pm »
No.
It's like saying that the motherboard of a computer is directly responsible for the WOW software.
The brain structure allows for thought, and it does impose physical limitations on thought, but it doesn't direct what thoughts occur.

Perhaps i didn't explain myself well.  I'm not saying that the hardware is solely responsible for our behavior, as it is an emergent phenomenon. I was just saying that our behavior is largely responsible for our likeliness to stay alive, at the individual level, and at the social level.  the governing patterns of behavior at the social level being 'morals'.

Societal rules have changed at a much faster rate than biological evolution.  At best evolution is one part of many influencing how we make decisions and set up our societies.  We did evolve as social creatures, but to try and apply evolution to say what is and isn't moral is misapplying the theory.

To phrase it another way, evolution can explain why we have rules for dealing with other humans, but it can't tell use what the ideal set of rules are.  If our morals were defined by natural selection it would follow evolutionarily stable stragegies which is a far cry from having objective morality.  I'd also hate to live in a society that gets its morals from such a cold and cruel theory.
Yes....i agree. 

Malcoid the Malcontent

  • Known
  • *
  • Posts: 36
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #127 on: December 11, 2008, 02:46:17 pm »
Quote from: LMNO
Malcoid, did I read right that you're not in High School yet?

No sir/madam, you did not. But thats okay, I dont mind!

Quote from: Malcoid the Magnanimous Manatee
I had a strong interest in exploring metaphysics in high school. Im more inclinded these days blah blah blah


Cain

  • Alea iacta est
  • Chekha
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 62586
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #128 on: December 11, 2008, 02:47:31 pm »
Not to mention that I doubt morality would give some humans a reproductive edge over other humans... Social rules, sure... morals I dunno about that.

Yes, that was something that I sortof considered but did not really know how to express.  According to Dawkins and the current biological consensus (AFAIK) evolution is geared towards individual selection and survival, not groups.  While this is somewhat offset by the fact humans are pack animals, I think many biologists would suggest that individual selection would win out over group selection if purely biologica inputs were considered.

I'm not sure when I'm going with this, but hopefully someone can build on it /need coffee

LMNO

  • Lubricated and Rabid Lungfish of Impending Sexdoom™
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 62136
  • Internet Fuckweasel of Haunted Pork Dimensions.
    • View Profile
    • Earfatigue Productions: When it has to sound like you give a shit.
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #129 on: December 11, 2008, 02:52:19 pm »
No.
It's like saying that the motherboard of a computer is directly responsible for the WOW software.
The brain structure allows for thought, and it does impose physical limitations on thought, but it doesn't direct what thoughts occur.

Perhaps i didn't explain myself well.  I'm not saying that the hardware is solely responsible for our behavior, as it is an emergent phenomenon. I was just saying that our behavior is largely responsible for our likeliness to stay alive, at the individual level, and at the social level.  the governing patterns of behavior at the social level being 'morals'.

Yes, but from a practical standpoint, morals are unachievable ideals, not behaviors.

Elder Iptuous

  • Professional Discordian and Physiognomist
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 5667
  • terribly tedious
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #130 on: December 11, 2008, 02:54:52 pm »
Yes, but from a practical standpoint, morals are unachievable ideals, not behaviors.

Aaaaah.
that's the disconnect.
I was not considering/referring to morals as an objective external ideal in my statements, but rather the patterns of behavior that we, as societies, enforce upon ourselves...
my bad.

AFK

  • We all
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 33482
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #131 on: December 11, 2008, 02:58:15 pm »
No.
It's like saying that the motherboard of a computer is directly responsible for the WOW software.
The brain structure allows for thought, and it does impose physical limitations on thought, but it doesn't direct what thoughts occur.

Perhaps i didn't explain myself well.  I'm not saying that the hardware is solely responsible for our behavior, as it is an emergent phenomenon. I was just saying that our behavior is largely responsible for our likeliness to stay alive, at the individual level, and at the social level.  the governing patterns of behavior at the social level being 'morals'.

This may or may not be true.  But the "morals" are a two way street.  In some ways they govern behavior in society, but also, behavior in society will govern the development of morals.  So again, this is why I think the evolution of morals has more to do with social evolution, not biological. 
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

LMNO

  • Lubricated and Rabid Lungfish of Impending Sexdoom™
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 62136
  • Internet Fuckweasel of Haunted Pork Dimensions.
    • View Profile
    • Earfatigue Productions: When it has to sound like you give a shit.
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #132 on: December 11, 2008, 02:59:52 pm »
Yes, but from a practical standpoint, morals are unachievable ideals, not behaviors.

Aaaaah.
that's the disconnect.
I was not considering/referring to morals as an objective external ideal in my statements, but rather the patterns of behavior that we, as societies, enforce upon ourselves...
my bad.


Maybe I should have stressed that more in my previous posts.

The last person whose behavior matched his moral code got nailed to a tree by a bunch of Romans.

Elder Iptuous

  • Professional Discordian and Physiognomist
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 5667
  • terribly tedious
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #133 on: December 11, 2008, 03:02:01 pm »
This may or may not be true.  But the "morals" are a two way street.  In some ways they govern behavior in society, but also, behavior in society will govern the development of morals.  So again, this is why I think the evolution of morals has more to do with social evolution, not biological. 
I'm saying you can't separate the two. 
the social evolution of a group has a direct bearing on its survival...

Vene

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 2863
  • Screaming Primate
    • View Profile
Re: Discordianism and Morality
« Reply #134 on: December 11, 2008, 03:10:34 pm »
This may or may not be true.  But the "morals" are a two way street.  In some ways they govern behavior in society, but also, behavior in society will govern the development of morals.  So again, this is why I think the evolution of morals has more to do with social evolution, not biological. 
I'm saying you can't separate the two. 
the social evolution of a group has a direct bearing on its survival...
But that's confusing the cause in effect.  In this case social evolution is changing biological evolution.

By the way, human society has existed for ~10,000 years, that is not nearly enough time for anything significant to happen in human evolution.