The Great Morality Diagrammatic Diatribe
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-12-2016, 04:27 PM
The Great Morality Diagrammatic Diatribe
We have an uncounted number of threads on Morality ... objective/subjective blah blah is/ought etc.

These always disintegrate into specific examples and counter-examples until something more trivial comes along (usually a Murikan hobby thing like guns and the use of them in schools).

This is an attempt at creating a baseline for discussion with a view to reaching a (hopefully visually attractive) consensus on the 'is' of morality.

We can discuss 'ought' later.

I'll add more thoughts as questions / challenges arise but here is the first draft of the diagram based largely on the first few pages of Velvet's thread utilising the list of 'moral foundations' from Jonathan Haidt's research:
[Image: 6MF.jpg]
(pic stolen from a ClydeLee post and concept originally brought to my attention by Bucky - thank you both)

I'm coming to the conclusion that 'empathy' relates to both developmental capacity (notably there is a deficiency in those with autistic traits) and also as a measure of scope rather than a value (or goal) in itself.

I'd appreciate feedback on any part of this but in particular in relation to 'desires' ... I can't think of a way to show them on the diagram as anything other than floating text but this doesn't anchor them as influencers in a way that is aesthetically pleasing.

I chose the word 'beliefs' just to get you thinking. 'Attitudes' or 'preferences' might be better.

[Image: 15p1ick.jpg]

At a later date, I'd like to take it all the way back to my contention that all behaviour is ultimately derived from our primitive (even primordial) fight/flight/freeze instincts... but the diagram is already looking too busy.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like DLJ's post
11-12-2016, 04:49 PM (This post was last modified: 11-12-2016 05:19 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: The Great Morality Diagrammatic Diatribe
(11-12-2016 04:27 PM)DLJ Wrote:  I'd appreciate feedback on any part of this but in particular in relation to 'desires' ... I can't think of a way to show them on the diagram as anything other than floating text but this doesn't anchor them as influencers in a way that is aesthetically pleasing.

Too many different dimensions for me to visualize and grok from one diagram. I'd probably split 'em up into multiple diagrams of the same basic flavor and stack 'em. Or maybe different overlays. Maybe cumulative overlays.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2016, 06:16 PM (This post was last modified: 11-12-2016 06:22 PM by julep.)
RE: The Great Morality Diagrammatic Diatribe
I haz headache.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like julep's post
11-12-2016, 06:16 PM
RE: The Great Morality Diagrammatic Diatribe
(11-12-2016 04:27 PM)DLJ Wrote:  We have an uncounted number of threads on Morality ... objective/subjective blah blah is/ought etc.

These always disintegrate into specific examples and counter-examples until something more trivial comes along (usually a Murikan hobby thing like guns and the use of them in schools).

This is an attempt at creating a baseline for discussion with a view to reaching a (hopefully visually attractive) consensus on the 'is' of morality.

We can discuss 'ought' later.

I'll add more thoughts as questions / challenges arise but here is the first draft of the diagram based largely on the first few pages of Velvet's thread utilising the list of 'moral foundations' from Jonathan Haidt's research:
[Image: 6MF.jpg]
(pic stolen from a ClydeLee post and concept originally brought to my attention by Bucky - thank you both)

I'm coming to the conclusion that 'empathy' relates to both developmental capacity (notably there is a deficiency in those with autistic traits) and also as a measure of scope rather than a value (or goal) in itself.

I'd appreciate feedback on any part of this but in particular in relation to 'desires' ... I can't think of a way to show them on the diagram as anything other than floating text but this doesn't anchor them as influencers in a way that is aesthetically pleasing.

I chose the word 'beliefs' just to get you thinking. 'Attitudes' or 'preferences' might be better.

[Image: eukdas.jpg]

At a later date, I'd like to take it all the way back to my contention that all behaviour is ultimately derived from our primitive (even primordial) fight/flight/freeze instincts... but the diagram is already looking too busy.

Typo: Umwelt (the w is pronounced like a v)

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2016, 10:20 PM
RE: The Great Morality Diagrammatic Diatribe
(11-12-2016 06:16 PM)Dom Wrote:  ...
Typo: Umwelt (the w is pronounced like a v)

Damn!

Sadcryface

(11-12-2016 04:49 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(11-12-2016 04:27 PM)DLJ Wrote:  I'd appreciate feedback ...

Too many different dimensions for me to visualize and grok from one diagram. I'd probably split 'em up into multiple diagrams of the same basic flavor and stack 'em. Or maybe different overlays. Maybe cumulative overlays.

Fair point. I was aiming for a moral 'landscape' but I get what you mean.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2016, 01:49 AM
RE: The Great Morality Diagrammatic Diatribe
(11-12-2016 10:20 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(11-12-2016 06:16 PM)Dom Wrote:  ...
Typo: Umwelt (the w is pronounced like a v)

Damn!

Sadcryface

Laugh out load

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2016, 03:42 AM
RE: The Great Morality Diagrammatic Diatribe
Pretty diagram. Not sure what it shows though? Levels at which I care for stuff are directly related to how far away they are from me? I like fucking? DLJ can't spell umwelt? (Apparently).

I like the first list with the columns and rows. Very visually appealing. If you could add another column I think it'd be more aesthetic though. Not sure what you could put in it. Oh and make it stretch across the page. And a pie chart! Ooo oo, and one of those zig-zaggy looking graphs with an arrow on and a picture of a pile of money.

Tongue

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
12-12-2016, 06:05 AM
RE: The Great Morality Diagrammatic Diatribe
The only thing you're describing with 'is' is behavior.

Certain cultures throw homosexuals off of rooftops. This is a fact. It is what 'is'.

We aren't talking about morality until we are talking about whether or not people 'ought' to throw homosexuals off of rooftops.

To say John was nice to Susan, but Bob was mean to Susan, in no way addresses morality.

DLJ, I think you are making the mistake of thinking that behavior you like (are attracted to) can be classified as moral, while behavior you dislike can be classified as immoral. The truth is, there is no such thing as moral or immoral behavior, and even if you make such a distinction, there is no evidence that one ought to behave in a certain way.

Does your diagram address the estimated 70 million psychopaths in the population? These people seem to not experience empathy in a way that is even remotely similar to the rest of the population.

If you ask me, your diagram is filled only with your own (and others who share similar views to yourself) biases, and it doesn't seem to tell us anything about moral and/or immoral behavior.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2016, 06:41 AM
RE: The Great Morality Diagrammatic Diatribe
(12-12-2016 06:05 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  DLJ, I think you are making the mistake of thinking that behavior you like (are attracted to) can be classified as moral, while behavior you dislike can be classified as immoral. The truth is, there is no such thing as moral or immoral behavior, and even if you make such a distinction, there is no evidence that one ought to behave in a certain way.

The "moral" traits further society, the "immoral" traits further the individual (maybe).

I like the chart but it requires a speaker to be taken in easily. Smile

I would use (or wish you had used) the colors given in the description of desires and beliefs throughout the diagram to make it easier to follow.

And I can't read what is on the arrows, which seems a crucial piece of info.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2016, 07:32 AM
RE: The Great Morality Diagrammatic Diatribe
At work.

Dear Mr Finney.

I think you are adding divisions into hairs that need be split.

However, I do agree that you are indeed totally free to split hairs however you may wish. Thumbsup

I wish I had more free time to engage with yourself in regards to your hair splitting.

For example:

It can be demonstrated as to why people should NOT 'Ought' to throw others who bat for the same gender from roof tops.

Do you see how differently my word use in the above sentence is to your own innitial one?

Cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peebothuhul's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: