Naturalism = Nihilism?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-07-2014, 01:14 AM
RE: Naturalism = Nihilism?
(24-07-2014 12:58 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  Nietzsche101,

You wrote: Is there a rational answer(which doesn't involve a soul) which can answer why we do/should chose the self sacrificing option, over the one of self preservation??


I really don't think there is a rational justification for self sacrifice.
My uncle had an accident a couple of years back. He was in control of a boat and he had a crash and his friend died.

Although he survived, he wished it was him that had died rather than his friend.

My take on this is that sometimes death is preferable to life.
Someone may feel incredible guilt from surviving, knowing that they could have saved the lives of others instead. I would consider this preference for self sacrifice to be selfish and rational.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-07-2014, 01:33 AM
RE: Naturalism = Nihilism?
@true scotsman

"We are never faced with that kind of choice in reality, whether to save ourselves or the species, because Human life does not require sacrifice"

- We are faced with it all the time!

eg. you are walking down the street, you come across a man beating a woman, about to rape her(which you state is objectivity wrong).....
what do you do? Do you intervene, risking your life? or do you simply walk away?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-07-2014, 01:36 AM
RE: Naturalism = Nihilism?
Or how about a less extreme example, The guy in front of me drops his wallet, I pick it up and notice there is $100 in it....
Why should I give it back to him, if "My philosophy holds life as the standard of value and my own life as my highest moral purpose. A moral code that demands self sacrifice and self abnegation for the good of others does not hold life as its standard but death."??
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-07-2014, 01:37 AM
RE: Naturalism = Nihilism?
@ Reltzik
"what difference would the objectivity of a morality (in any sense other than a property of general universal applicability) make? We'd still be free to disagree with it. We'd still be free to reject it."
- yeah but it would still exist, much the same way gravity exists whether you believe/understand in it or not..
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-07-2014, 04:29 AM
Re: RE: Naturalism = Nihilism?
(23-07-2014 06:53 PM)nietzsche101 Wrote:  I'm not quite sure what your trying to say, but it think it's still besides my point anyway...

I don't think it offers a rational answer as to why we should, when put in this situation, chose a over b in the following:
a) a action that is "good" for the "whole"(be it our family, group, our species, or all concious life) - but is "bad" for me
b) an action that is "bad" for the "whole" - while "good" for me.


I mean surely we have all faced this dilemma in our life.... you have to be very naive to say there's never a division between what is best for the whole, and what is best for our own individual selfs?


Is there a rational answer(which doesn't involve a soul) which can answer why we do/should chose the self sacrificing option, over the one of self preservation??

I'm not quite getting the desire for there to be "a rational answer" or more to the reasoning than there is.

Yes, there may not be an answer to what's more right or how to see what's better fit, so what? We as conscious beings are forced to choose, even not choosing is a choice. It's something that gives life and it's absurdity or despair a purpose.

The point of not choosing your personal benefit cases over the groups is based upon hoping the social contract system benefits you in the future. You can't see the future and may be taking small term benefits over actual long term benefits.

Do you understand the quandaries of what they call game theory and the 2 guys in interrogation scenario? I can't explain it off the top of by head but it deals with the problem of risk % and moral choice.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-07-2014, 04:30 AM
RE: Naturalism = Nihilism?
(24-07-2014 01:37 AM)nietzsche101 Wrote:  @ Reltzik
"what difference would the objectivity of a morality (in any sense other than a property of general universal applicability) make? We'd still be free to disagree with it. We'd still be free to reject it."
- yeah but it would still exist, much the same way gravity exists whether you believe/understand in it or not..

Nietzsche,
You might be interested in George R. Price:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_R._Price
"He wrote what is still widely held to be the best mathematical, biological and evolutionary representation of altruism. He also pioneered the application of game theory to evolutionary biology, in a co-authored 1973 paper with John Maynard Smith."

"Price’s 'mathematical' theory of altruism reasons that organisms are more likely to show altruism toward each other as they become more genetically similar to each other. As such, in a species that requires two parents to reproduce, an organism is most likely to show altruistic behavior to a biological parent, full sibling, or direct offspring. The reason for this is that each of these relatives’ genetic make up contains (on average in the case of siblings) 50% of the genes that are found in the original organism. So if the original organism dies as a result of an altruistic act it can still manage to propagate its full genetic heritage as long as two or more of these close relatives are saved. Consequently an organism is less likely to show altruistic behavior to a biological grandparent, grandchild, aunt/uncle, niece/nephew or half-sibling (each contain one-fourth of the genes found in the original organism); and even less likely to show altruism to a first cousin (contains one-eighth of the genes found in the original organism). The theory then holds that the further genetically removed two organisms are from each other the less likely they are to show altruism to each other. If true then altruistic (kind) behavior is not truly selfless and is instead an adaptation that organisms have in order to promote their own genetic heritage."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-07-2014, 04:55 AM
RE: Naturalism = Nihilism?
ClydeLee)"The point of not choosing your personal benefit cases over the groups is based upon hoping the social contract system benefits you in the future. You can't see the future and may be taking small term benefits over actual long term benefits."

Avalon)"If true then altruistic (kind) behaviour is not truly selfless and is instead an adaptation that organisms have in order to promote their own genetic heritage"

^ There are countless examples of altruism way outside the bounds of "reward latter" or "survival of genes"...
Do I really have to list examples??
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-07-2014, 05:14 AM
Re: RE: Naturalism = Nihilism?
(24-07-2014 04:55 AM)nietzsche101 Wrote:  ClydeLee)"The point of not choosing your personal benefit cases over the groups is based upon hoping the social contract system benefits you in the future. You can't see the future and may be taking small term benefits over actual long term benefits."

Avalon)"If true then altruistic (kind) behaviour is not truly selfless and is instead an adaptation that organisms have in order to promote their own genetic heritage"

^ There are countless examples of altruism way outside the bounds of "reward latter" or "survival of genes"...
Do I really have to list examples??

Genetic behaviors and occurrences have side effects that don't exactly work out ideally... Yes that exists, but so what? It doesn't change the way it came to be.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-07-2014, 05:35 AM
RE: Naturalism = Nihilism?
Sorry if I've misinterpreted you...
but are you saying; that what most people would call "virtue", is actually just a negative side effect of genetic development?....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-07-2014, 05:48 AM
RE: Naturalism = Nihilism?
(23-07-2014 05:05 PM)nietzsche101 Wrote:  The only reasoning I'm hearing from the atheists is "There are self-serving reasons to not be a jerk"....

I said empathy, right on the last page. Do you not have empathy?

(23-07-2014 08:27 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Also, there's empathy. At the end of the day, I have no desire to harm others. It's not who I am. But that's just me. I've talked to numerous Christians who claim they'd be serial killers or thieves if they weren't constantly under the surveillance of an invisible super-cop.



(23-07-2014 05:05 PM)nietzsche101 Wrote:  ... yeah that's true, but there are also many self-serving reasons to be a jerk.... what about these???

Empathy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: