Ethical Question... - Page 10

"However rational thoughts could lead to "wrong" doings because egoism can easily be rationalized"

Thus the need for societal laws. Humans commit many mistakes in the name of percieved rational thought.

On November 25 2008 18:02 Gologol wrote: "However rational thoughts could lead to "wrong" doings because egoism can easily be rationalized" Thus the need for societal laws. Humans commit many mistakes in the name of percieved rational thought.

yes it looks like that when you look at this society.

this is shortsighted loop-thinking

no offence

On November 25 2008 18:02 Gologol wrote: "However rational thoughts could lead to "wrong" doings because egoism can easily be rationalized" Thus the need for societal laws. Humans commit many mistakes in the name of percieved rational thought.

way to quote one little part of all what i said and answer to it and not the whole post when i continued talking about that.

Well ethically, if you really wanted to buy it on a clean conscious, you should make sure he buy ecstasy instead of crack or meth.

On November 25 2008 12:53 brambolius wrote: what i meant to say was torture and kill for obsolutely no reason but my own personal pleasure or gain.

This definition still fits human sacrifice which was practiced in many cultures.

Earlier in the discussion you said that people who express opinions like mine are "trying to feel better about themselves in relation to the world." Based on your comments about humans in relation to animals I think that your need to believe in a higher morality is similar to many peoples' need to believe in religion in order to give their life higher meaning (after all religion at it's core is just the establishment of and justification for overriding moral principles). The idea that we are just another species is inherently unsatisfying but, unfortunately, it is also the truth.

ffs couldn't agree more
<3 TedHastings

On November 26 2008 16:14 TedHastings wrote: Show nested quote + On November 25 2008 12:53 brambolius wrote: what i meant to say was torture and kill for obsolutely no reason but my own personal pleasure or gain. This definition still fits human sacrifice which was practiced in many cultures. Earlier in the discussion you said that people who express opinions like mine are "trying to feel better about themselves in relation to the world." Based on your comments about humans in relation to animals I think that your need to believe in a higher morality is similar to many peoples' need to believe in religion in order to give their life higher meaning (after all religion at it's core is just the establishment of and justification for overriding moral principles). The idea that we are just another species is inherently unsatisfying but, unfortunately, it is also the truth.

If you are saying we are just another species, you are wrong, plain and simple.

there is no need for "a higher morality", at least not in the "short" run.

allot seem to think morals = christianity = god, morals = society = culture.
i just disagree thats all

On November 26 2008 19:21 brambolius wrote: Show nested quote + On November 26 2008 16:14 TedHastings wrote:   On November 25 2008 12:53 brambolius wrote: what i meant to say was torture and kill for obsolutely no reason but my own personal pleasure or gain. This definition still fits human sacrifice which was practiced in many cultures. Earlier in the discussion you said that people who express opinions like mine are "trying to feel better about themselves in relation to the world." Based on your comments about humans in relation to animals I think that your need to believe in a higher morality is similar to many peoples' need to believe in religion in order to give their life higher meaning (after all religion at it's core is just the establishment of and justification for overriding moral principles). The idea that we are just another species is inherently unsatisfying but, unfortunately, it is also the truth. If you are saying we are just another species, you are wrong, plain and simple. there is no need for "a higher morality", at least not in the "short" run. allot seem to think morals = christianity = god, morals = society = culture. i just disagree thats all

What? you dont think we are just another smart animal? because thats what science tells us, so you disagree with science?

okay, here's the rest of your post.

"however we can see in complex animals that live in society that they do share, even when dont need to, even when it would have no repercusion in the status in their society"

I agree with that.

"so i believe a the human in a pure form and not shaped by social morality has a natural tendency to be kind to others."

But laws protect this "pure form" from those born with psychosis. I have no problem agreeing with you if we were all born with a full deck of cards, but we aren't.

I think it's also important to note, that even sharp minds are dulled by stress and emotion. If you rely totally on your own facilities to evaluate decisions, you will make mistakes.