No morality, just ethics?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-10-2014, 12:07 PM
RE: No morality, just ethics?
(19-10-2014 11:40 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(19-10-2014 10:31 PM)Chas Wrote:  And if other people's actions are a threat to people other than yourself?
Then it depends on how it impacts me.
If a person spanks my kid then I will get involved.
If my neighbor spanks his child then I will not get involved.

If people get in fights on the street, I will not get involved.

Would you never intervene in any circumstance?
Would you not intervene if you saw a child being whipped? Someone being raped? Someone being robbed?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2014, 12:07 PM
RE: No morality, just ethics?
(20-10-2014 05:46 AM)DLJ Wrote:  -- Individual behaviours which collectively determine the culture of the enterprise and is dependent on both organisational and individual ethics.
People are adaptable.
Often when introduced into an established culture we assess and generally conform, in order to fit in, and to succeed within that culture.
Culture and behaviours are more than just ethics.

Cultures are very difficult to change, the path of lest resistance is to try and fit in.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2014, 12:12 PM
RE: No morality, just ethics?
(20-10-2014 12:07 PM)Rik Wrote:  
(19-10-2014 11:40 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Then it depends on how it impacts me.
If a person spanks my kid then I will get involved.
If my neighbor spanks his child then I will not get involved.

If people get in fights on the street, I will not get involved.

Would you never intervene in any circumstance?
Would you not intervene if you saw a child being whipped? Someone being raped? Someone being robbed?
It depends on many variables.

If I saw two people fighting, I'd probably just keep walking. I know many people would probably get their cell phone's out and record it for youtube. But if I want to watch a decent fight I would prefer a professional boxing match rather than some pathetic street slap.

I've never seen someone on the street with a whip and I've never seen someone on the street mid rape. (what country do you live in?)

I did see someone doing a robbery, he was running out of a supermarket as I was walking in. I did think about tackling him or tripping him, but then I thought better of it and let him pass.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2014, 12:20 PM
RE: No morality, just ethics?
(20-10-2014 12:12 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(20-10-2014 12:07 PM)Rik Wrote:  Would you never intervene in any circumstance?
Would you not intervene if you saw a child being whipped? Someone being raped? Someone being robbed?
It depends on many variables.

If I saw two people fighting, I'd probably just keep walking. I know many people would probably get their cell phone's out and record it for youtube. But if I want to watch a decent fight I would prefer a professional boxing match rather than some pathetic street slap.

I've never seen someone on the street with a whip and I've never seen someone on the street mid rape. (what country do you live in?)

I did see someone doing a robbery, he was running out of a supermarket as I was walking in. I did think about tackling him or tripping him, but then I thought better of it and let him pass.

It is interesting you don't even mention the idea of calling the cops or yelling for help.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2014, 12:32 PM
RE: No morality, just ethics?
(19-10-2014 10:28 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(18-10-2014 11:35 AM)OddGamer Wrote:  I've come to think that when we discuss atheists having morality, we're playing into theist hands. They define morality as obedience to god, and we've been socially programmed to think that morality is a desirable trait. As such we argue that we have morality, too.
...
This would avoid the entire trap. We would also avoid terms such as 'good' and 'evil', instead referencing 'unethical' and 'ethical'. It would mean that 'moral', 'good', and 'evil' are appeal to emotion buzzwords.
I really dislike use of moral language. I have opinions, I recognise that my choices and actions have consequences. I recognise that others have diverse ideas, opinions, wants and needs. I recognise that we cohabitate within societies and that we often have conflicts of interest.
I cannot judge whether another person is behaving immorally. I cannot hold them to my opinions and standards as they are operating under their own opinions and needs and wants. It is not my place to judge others, to stop them or punish them for being immoral. I am not a god, I am a human. I take care of myself and let others take care of themselves. If other people's actions are a threat to me then I react, otherwise I tolerate.

I view the morality system as a way for people to justify to themselves interfering in other people's affairs. To seek to control, to get conformance. For some reason many people want to control others within their own society even when the actions of others have no impact on themselves.

This seems to assume that all others use "morality" to refer to some external standard. That is not a valid assumption.

Your closing assertion is a fundamental non sequitur, unless one genuinely presupposes others to act for literally no reason.
(or, you know, you, as C, declaring that "A does not affect B" does not make it so)

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2014, 12:35 PM
RE: No morality, just ethics?
(20-10-2014 12:20 PM)Rik Wrote:  It is interesting you don't even mention the idea of calling the cops or yelling for help.
The guy was running pretty fast.
By the time I would have got my phone out he would have been out the door, by the time I dialed the police he would have been out of sight.
Noone was in any danger, what would have been the point of yelling for help?
The store security gaurd was already yelling "Stop!"
I thought he did a pretty great job of yelling.
I don't see how I could have added value by yelling. If I wasn't willing to tackle the guy why would have I yelled out to others to forcibly stop him?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2014, 12:35 PM
RE: No morality, just ethics?
(20-10-2014 12:12 PM)Stevil Wrote:  It depends on many variables.

If I saw two people fighting, I'd probably just keep walking. I know many people would probably get their cell phone's out and record it for youtube. But if I want to watch a decent fight I would prefer a professional boxing match rather than some pathetic street slap.

I've never seen someone on the street with a whip and I've never seen someone on the street mid rape. (what country do you live in?)

I would also say a certain generosity of spirit would interpret "saw" as "came into reasonable evidence for the occurence of" instead of meaning literally "stumbled across while out walking", which seems rather fatuous.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
20-10-2014, 12:40 PM
RE: No morality, just ethics?
(20-10-2014 12:32 PM)cjlr Wrote:  This seems to assume that all others use "morality" to refer to some external standard. That is not a valid assumption.
No that's not my assumption. I know when it comes to atheists they tend to inflate their own personal opinions to be a subjective morality, but I also recognise that they expect others to follow their own subjective morality. Just look at Chas here, already throwing insult ad hominem non sequitur attacks at me for not conforming to his personal moral standard.

(20-10-2014 12:32 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Your closing assertion is a fundamental non sequitur, unless one genuinely presupposes others to act for literally no reason.
(or, you know, you, as C, declaring that "A does not affect B" does not make it so)
There are many, many people who look to intervene even when things don't impact them personally, just look at laws against gay marriage, against prostitution, against polygomy...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2014, 12:40 PM
RE: No morality, just ethics?
(20-10-2014 12:35 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(20-10-2014 12:20 PM)Rik Wrote:  It is interesting you don't even mention the idea of calling the cops or yelling for help.
The guy was running pretty fast.
By the time I would have got my phone out he would have been out the door, by the time I dialed the police he would have been out of sight.
Noone was in any danger, what would have been the point of yelling for help?
The store security gaurd was already yelling "Stop!"
I thought he did a pretty great job of yelling.
I don't see how I could have added value by yelling. If I wasn't willing to tackle the guy why would have I yelled out to others to forcibly stop him?

You don't mention it in any of the events I mentioned. Your idea of non-interference seems utterly heartless.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2014, 12:44 PM
RE: No morality, just ethics?
(20-10-2014 12:40 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(20-10-2014 12:32 PM)cjlr Wrote:  This seems to assume that all others use "morality" to refer to some external standard. That is not a valid assumption.
No that's not my assumption. I know when it comes to atheists they tend to inflate their own personal opinions to be a subjective morality, but I also recognise that they expect others to follow their own subjective morality. Just look at Chas here, already throwing insult ad hominem non sequitur attacks at me for not conforming to his personal moral standard.

Since when is empathy a "moral standard"? It is merely an attribute of human beings. Where are those "insult ad hominem non sequitur attacks " because I don't see them.

Quote:
(20-10-2014 12:32 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Your closing assertion is a fundamental non sequitur, unless one genuinely presupposes others to act for literally no reason.
(or, you know, you, as C, declaring that "A does not affect B" does not make it so)
There are many, many people who look to intervene even when things don't impact them personally, just look at laws against gay marriage, against prostitution, against polygomy...

But no one mentioned those, did they. Non sequitur.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Rik's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: