Universal Morality: My Take on a Moral Counter-Apologetic
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-10-2016, 10:04 PM
RE: Universal Morality: My Take on a Moral Counter-Apologetic
(21-10-2016 09:42 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  
(17-10-2016 07:20 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  Confucius phrased it better- "Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself."

Too bad Jesus didn't say it that way, he must have fell asleep in class that day.


But surely he did say it that way when he says "do unto others as you would have others do unto you".

What's the difference? (That's a rhetorical question. I'm not interested in a big long explanation of the difference. I don't see one, ok, (oh jeez, this forum is a pain, you have to qualify yourself, support yourself with peer reviewed papers ( and then there is Kant's categorical imperative (no don't bring that out, you've done it before and look what happened. NO, not the same. totally different "act so that the axiom on which you act can be universally applied (shit is it axion or grund norm? (I realize now that I've never read Kant in the original German, I feel an anxiety attack coming on, have I got this all wrong?)))))

Sorry, I will reply anyway for my own pleasure and not to your attention. Feel free to ignore me.

Confucius quote advocate for negative reinforcement. To reward people, don't submit them to crap you dislike (or you think they won't like).

Jesus's quote advocate for positive reinforcement. To reward people, give them something you like (and you think they will too).

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes epronovost's post
22-10-2016, 06:15 AM
RE: Universal Morality: My Take on a Moral Counter-Apologetic
(21-10-2016 10:04 PM)epronovost Wrote:  
(21-10-2016 09:42 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  But surely he did say it that way when he says "do unto others as you would have others do unto you".

What's the difference? (That's a rhetorical question. I'm not interested in a big long explanation of the difference. I don't see one, ok, (oh jeez, this forum is a pain, you have to qualify yourself, support yourself with peer reviewed papers ( and then there is Kant's categorical imperative (no don't bring that out, you've done it before and look what happened. NO, not the same. totally different "act so that the axiom on which you act can be universally applied (shit is it axion or grund norm? (I realize now that I've never read Kant in the original German, I feel an anxiety attack coming on, have I got this all wrong?)))))

Sorry, I will reply anyway for my own pleasure and not to your attention. Feel free to ignore me.

Confucius quote advocate for negative reinforcement. To reward people, don't submit them to crap you dislike (or you think they won't like).

Jesus's quote advocate for positive reinforcement. To reward people, give them something you like (and you think they will too).

Yep, the Jesus version can be used to force your preferences on a person without their consideration.

The Confuscius version basically instructs a person to leave people alone, but if you insist on doing something, then find out what they don't like first.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: