absolute morals
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-07-2013, 08:55 PM
RE: absolute morals
Personally I have always liked a relative absolutism or absolute relativism (Not really sure which :coolSmile

I have decided to call it spectrum theory based on my Christian Doctrine Teacher's Catchphrase "It's a spectrum" (we made t-shirts).

This is essentially what Rahn127 was mentioning

What this essentially means is that you can create a vague set of moral precepts. A good example is the ten commandments which have been deemed to be evil if they are broken by Christians. (note I am not implying that the ten commandments are right I am merely using them as an example). But then it is a case of relativism to see whether the moral law applies.

For Example the Law regarding that one should not bear false witness against one's neighbour. Interpreted by the Catholic Church to mean that you should not lie to someone. As such you must analyse to see weather a statement is a lie or not in each instance. Is this statement meant to deceive. Is it a falsehood. Was there intention to tell a lie. All of these can effect under which the moral precept covers.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-07-2013, 02:06 AM (This post was last modified: 06-07-2013 02:22 AM by absols.)
RE: absolute morals
(05-07-2013 07:50 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  All we are really looking for is clarity.

Do you understand what this means ? -................................. "The blue bonnet sings carefully along the objective."
Do you understand what I'm trying to communicate to you when I write this sentence. ^

You are not effectively communicating with us.
We don't understand in much the same way you don't understand the above sentence. ^

Unless of course, you're doing it on purpose.

u cant b communicating anything when u r asking smthg from another, period

can u understand this bonney??? of course not

so again i repeat, u have no right to disrespect posters freedom rights when their expressions is clearly not against anyone nor anything
u r only showing then ur will to reject else existence, so against individuality and humanity like religious mean for a powerful entity possessing everything and everyone as one

my posts could b a piece of art that i mean for myself pleasure, how is it ur business

or the will to improvise new ideas and concepts, what do u have to get from that

anyway each word u use as a big title is opposed to its true meaning

communication is not a will, otherwise the will is what is apparent not communication

communication is free different contributions to an objective same present thing

when u dont recognize the existence of smthg u also meant u cant mean to communicate anything

communication is an end not a condition of things existence
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-07-2013, 02:13 AM
RE: absolute morals
I'm amazed

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-07-2013, 04:56 AM
RE: absolute morals
(05-07-2013 07:38 PM)absols Wrote:  no

my idea introduce simply the notion of else rights

when i post in any general topic that do not concern anything particularly nor do i point anyone negatively, is nt there where free expression is an absolute right or not???

u r saying not, as if it is u so the others that possess the right to understand what anyone might say

so it proves how u dont have the basic notion of morals, in meaning to violate else rights for urself present pretense being the exclusive one

that is why u dont have the basic sense to respect how another is not to justify himself expressions or found a way to compromise with urs or to convince u about anything

u r claiming being atheists while obviously u reason as fundamental religious ones do

u obviously has no sense of being an individual when forums are meant exclusively for indvidiuals responsable exchange of free expressions about anything

when u dislike others words forums are what provide the space that confirm the definitive distance with everyone else, so u can just write watever u want without having to mention what another said

forums are the perfect space for free communications rights in the absence of reality between different posters or subjective perspective of others sights
so the only reason of communication become free then it cant b but through positive ways

freedom, so leanin on nothing to get forward is possible only in positive means

while positive means can b always objective

so u can bring a dozen to support ur claim about my posts here the fact still remain the same

u have no right to violate my right to post and deform my words nor that u have any right to post anything that has no relation with morality

what is funny is ur excuses that are clear lies

how wat others post is ur business when the topic concern everybody and everything so never u and what others agree upon
the more u show how what u seek is some agreement with others about everything the more it is clear that u dont mean but urself above everything rights

Here's a plan. You post in your language, we'll use the google translate. Thumbsup

(What you say contrasts how you say it)

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
06-07-2013, 05:03 AM
RE: absolute morals
I'm now of the opinion that his choice of words are done on purpose in order to derail any actual conversation on the topic.
He's been added to my ignore list, so I won't ever have to read that mess again.

As for everyone else, when it comes to the topic of morality, I think no one explains it better than Scott (TheoreticalBullshit)






A particular action or choice is morally right when it promotes happiness, well being or health or it somehow minimizes unnecessary harm or suffering or it does both.

A particular action or choice is morally wrong when it diminishes happiness, well being or health or it somehow causes unnecessary harm or suffering or it does both

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-07-2013, 05:36 AM
RE: absolute morals
(06-07-2013 05:03 AM)Rahn127 Wrote:  I think no one explains it better than Scott (TheoreticalBullshit)

I used to like him. Then I found out he's a soap opera star. Tongue

Chemical intelligence and vectors, I tell ya! I know I'm right, cause it gets me high! Big Grin

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-07-2013, 06:13 AM
RE: absolute morals
I think there are inborn "morals" that are universal, and they are instinctual. Like all instincts, they are present to different degrees in different people.

They are based on the preservation of the species.

They are the stuff that heroes are made of, the reason someone decides in a split second to jump into a dangerous body of water to rescue a complete stranger.

They are the reason most people will save a crying baby from danger, even if it's not theirs.

They are the reason it will either generate action or at least disturb you if you witness someone treating a little child cruelly.

They are the reason you will go to extremes to protect your own offspring, mate, and parents.

So then people refine these basic instincts to include an expanded list of items and call it morals.

Stoning someone to death is a case where man imposed morals supercede instinctual morals, and that is why it is repulsive to anyone outside that moral construct.

[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
06-07-2013, 06:36 AM
RE: absolute morals
(06-07-2013 06:13 AM)Dom Wrote:  I think there are inborn "morals" that are universal, and they are instinctual. Like all instincts, they are present to different degrees in different people.

Epigenetics. Has to be chemical.

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
06-07-2013, 06:51 AM
RE: absolute morals
[quote/]

Here's a plan. You post in your language, we'll use the google translate. Thumbsup

(What you say contrasts how you say it)
[/quote]

NO it is not up to u but urselves hypocrite religious guys

first there is no plan

second u have no business with what i write now and later

third i will sue u if u touch my posts, they are mine alone

n google anything u want else, not my posts

it is amazing such low attitude in meaning to steal another ideas on a thread called morality

which show again what morals u represent, possessive subjective wills that has nothing to do with existing things n present life

and contrasts is the only thing that u do

on the contrary how things are said is the truth, which is why u cant make any sense at all while u keep insisting to intimidate with ur cheap lies

like start by showing knowing anything before meaning contrasts
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-07-2013, 07:18 AM
RE: absolute morals
(06-07-2013 06:51 AM)absols Wrote:  NO it is not up to u but urselves hypocrite religious guys

first there is no plan

second u have no business with what i write now and later

third i will sue u if u touch my posts, they are mine alone

n google anything u want else, not my posts

it is amazing such low attitude in meaning to steal another ideas on a thread called morality

which show again what morals u represent, possessive subjective wills that has nothing to do with existing things n present life

and contrasts is the only thing that u do

on the contrary how things are said is the truth, which is why u cant make any sense at all while u keep insisting to intimidate with ur cheap lies

like start by showing knowing anything before meaning contrasts

So... I take it you don't get the irony of proselytising egalitarian morality. Consider

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: