100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
|
Topic:
Where do morals come from???
|
|
Evidence for what claims Thorb? What kind of evidence do you suggest is needed to show that universal morality exists?
well ... maybe a study of children like Di talked about that actually was conducted without outside influences ... hmmm hard to do. We do seem to not want to use people as lab rats. It doesn't matter though.... without one ... the idea is just that... and idea ... no facts, no proof. Its up to you ... who wants to claim that it exists ... to develop that proof ... not me. It is not a matter of whether or not children hit one another.
It os a matter of whether or not they think that it is wrong to do so, even if there were no rule about it as compared to other rules without moral import, such as behavior in a store. yes it is ... and it does not have any basis in fact until it is done in a real clinical study with the bias removed. I want to see that.... not the hearsay of something I have not seen as true in real world observation. If you ask them it would depend on many variables. the level of unfair or cheating at the game etc. would also make a difference in the answer ... did the asker ... coach in any way.... its easily done with children. That is why their testimony is not taken 100%. Reality and imagination are not completely seperate at a young age. Besides ... morality to be just there.... would occur before they could even answer the question. At what age do you imagine it appears? 1,2,3,5, 11, 55. I suggest its learned. and evidence points in that direction ... not yours. You fail to understand ... by learned we mean ... not just from others but internally via trial and error. That was part of my original post you failed to comprehend or tried to sidestep with strawman arguments. [go look up strawman arguments yourself ... you need the review] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Where do morals come from???
Edited by
Thorb
on
Sun 01/30/11 09:24 AM
|
|
if there is no rule about hitting someone who does not play fair, would it be ok to hit him? a
and the child will say no – YOU SEE the lack of a rule in one case causes no harm so the rule is simply something the child adheres to because they were told by authority to do so. But a rule about hurting another person is NOT necessary for the child to understand that it’s wrong. MORALITY, in that case has not been taught from outside – the child is even too young to explain the difference but not too young to hold a MORAL, internally, that says it’s wrong to hurt another person. SO – the real questions are – if social conventions are not morality where does morality come from, what does it entail, and how globally consistent would it be in the absence of social conventions? Does all that make sense now? interesting and a good read. now ... as for the child you ask about the hitting. I would like to see the study and ages and culture the children came from. Personal experience says ... its false information and therefor does not back up the idea. now that may be antidotal but then this post is hearsay. I see children hit other children for not playing fair all the time. I cannot believe your claim without real evidence. the earlier part of the post stated children deduce from levels of pain and hurt the levels of right and wrong ... good and bad ... values of the actions and to me that is closer to the truth and is ... learned behaviour ... not some instinctual moral base. the instinct is ... self preservation ... the rest develops as we develop empathy. ... ......... creative ... you still have no evidence for your claims. so they will go onto that pile called ... personal opinion. and your argument so far is no better than saying I cannot prove god does not exist ... so there is a god ... And that is laughable. I'm not interjecting between you and spider ... that is your problem ... you are losing so far. you should look up strawman ... that was your primary arguments against what I originally poste. you get lost in your own rhetoric. morals origin has been accepted.... good ... then what are you blowing off about my original post.... Oh ... the universal morals nonexistance... hmmm. prove them. Until you do.... they like god... don't exist outside of your thoughts. post some studies that at least lean in that direction. your rhetorical arguments against the semantics of others posts don't work. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Was there last year but lack of common experiences, culture, nostalgia, can drag on it after the fantastic sex and hormonal boost starts to wane.
As stated ... 10 years don't mean that much when your older but when your in your 20's ... its huge. as for not over 25 ... that's too funny.... most women I met under 25 were emotional basket cases and even in my 20's I wouldn't go out with them. They were still children. The only time I found them desirable was when I was a teenager. I now prefer women in their 40's or 50's but hey ... that's 10 or more years younger than me in a lot of cases. Also as you age ... age means less than lifestyle. An active older person is much more desirable than a 25 year old couch potato with earbuds and carpal tunnel setting into those texting thumbs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Val Day .... gets shortened to VD in my cirle.
and it is only a con. an attempt at suckering in idiots into buying cards and candy and flowers ...... its a total commercial con. Never ever had good feelings about it. ... There is a minor mid-winter pickme up aspect to it but in most cases its a mid-winter let-down ... bordering on depressive agent. I think it should be cancelled forever. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Past faults and sex
Edited by
Thorb
on
Sun 01/30/11 08:17 AM
|
|
It's pretty common knowledge that past issues of many kinds affect feelings about sex in both men and women. I have to totally agree with this post. Freud said it has to do with every part of your life ... but hey... we are not that Freudian anymore. We all have some self image and sexual experience issues that can weigh on the present but as Red said .... with the right person... all is forgiven or forgotten and things just cruise on down the road. As for ex's love and sex issues..... that is normally a big part of the reason they are an ex. and ... references to them should be kept to a minimum. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
black holes stop time?
|
|
not sure about the over thinking part but ... if we take string theory into the picture then lots of things change... the big bang is losing its appeal.
a multiverse is taking form and black holes may be the portals between universes. ... my thought. its all done with math ... and math now says there are many many universes. just think fractels and add universes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Where do morals come from???
Edited by
Thorb
on
Fri 01/28/11 03:11 PM
|
|
Thorb:
What I mean is that ... story tellers made up our morals. creative: If by "morals" you mean lessons about right/wrong behavior that are derived from a story, then I would agree that they made up the stories in order to teach a lesson. It does not follow from that that the lesson itself is necessarily man-made, although it may. I mean, we make up words to communicate ideas about things in and of the world and ourselves, however, it does not follow that we made up what we talk about. Thorb: in your first quote you play again with semantics ... words and meanings and our ability to communicate... What you've called 'playing with semantics' was intended to ensure that I understood what you meant by "morals". That indicates my interest in conversing with you, which is beginning to wane. The goal of my doing so was to increase the liklihood of successful communication. it does not ensure anything ... its only you .... playing with semantics ... Its not what ... I meant as morals .... its what the dictionary defines morals as. that matters .... not your silly twisting of the definitions. Your logic through your retort is flawed and working on false similarity of ideas.
Show me. Thorb:
There is no universality outside of as someone stated... creative: It seems that there is no distinction being made here between a statement and what the statement corresponds to. The difference is pivotal. Universally speaking the above does not make much sense to me. I mean, it is a universal truth that humans must have sustenance or we will die. It is a universal truth that we all must be born in order to live. Likewise, one's current life on earth will end one day. The list goes on and on. None of those things, or any other universal truth for that matter, are contingent upon their being said. They are true regardless, because true statements simply reflect the state of affairs... again ... you go out of context in the quote .... ... if you want to remain in context ... quote the whole paragraph. universal truths have nothing to do with the discussion.... strawman. ... i was talking of there being no universal morality and anyone not trying to build a strawman would know that. Thorb:
in your second quote you take the statement out of context to answer it... that is called a strawman argument. That is not what a strawman is. The context is the origin of morality and morals, so the claim was not taken out of context. You claimed that "there is no universality outside of as someone stated". That is a very broad statement in this context, one of which that is false. I simply showed how it was in error. Universality is not contingent upon language. Our understanding it is. I'm not trying to be difficult here. Rather, I am trying to make sure we understand each other, and perhaps attempting to also offer the tools that are required to understand my view, which is not all that common. yes the context of the statement is morals and morality and you took it to mean anything ... that is out of context ... and that does make a strawman argument... . even you posting it again without the complete paragraph is taking it out of context . Please look up context in the dictionary after you look up morals. Thorb:
Morals grow and change with society creative: Agreed. the third quote covers the gist of it all .... no universal morals exist... they are not static and change with time. Again, if morals are the conventional understanding of a society/group regarding acceptable and unacceptable behavior, then I agree that they have indeed changed throughout human history. Namely, they've grown farther from a concept of God as the authority figure, at least in Western philosophy/culture. However, it does not necessarily follow from that that there are no universal morals or morality. It would be more accurate to say that there are none you know of. . God has nothing to do with this discussion. unless that is your futile argument for a universal morality. and that makes your argument fall apart very quickly. not sure if I got all the quotes in quotes right ... but hey ... this all seems to be quite the waste of time. If you can come up with some universal morals ... tell us where we can find any proof of them ... something that doesn't look like animal instinct of survival and the logical deductions of how we best attain that survival. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
mayan calendar
|
|
Personally I so absolutely no difference between a religious or non-religious person in these cases.
Makes no difference at all. End of days ... armageddon ... end times ... 2012 catastrophe. or just falling off a ladder and breaking your neck. dead is dead ... and that is the end of this world for you. make peace with yourself/god/whatever and realize that you could be living your last moment at any moment and it really doesn't matter if its the last moment for everyone or not. Except if there is a big line at the gate it might take a little longer to get in. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Where do morals come from???
|
|
Here's the problem with the belief that morality comes from the society. If that were true, then society and morality would never change.
totally false assumption .... when society itself is not static and constantly changes ... then the morality of society would also constantly change. show me a society that does not change ... especially a large society. ... in a small one ... no change is almost possible or your perception is unable to detect the small changes. which is most likely the truth of the matter. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Transient World and Home
|
|
grew up in one house in the burbs of Toronto. 25 years appx.
the whole neighbourhood was disbanded from inflation and marriage and work etc. Have a friend from then but hardly ever see eachother. Kept changing the groups of people i hung with all through my life. I get bored easily ... probably add of some sort. Moved to another city for University and lived there for 15 years ... that was my home and I knew and know many people in that city. a woman lead me out to the boonies where I'v now lived for almost 20 years. great neighbours and friends but not old old friends. this is now my home. My original home is unrecognizable and nobody I knew still lives the area. parents are dead ... best friend is dead. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
My Experiment with truth.
|
|
The reality of truth about reality is that its not a static thing. [that applies to both reality and truth] If what you just posted is the truth then: If "truth and reality are always changing", then eventually it will become true that "truth and reality don't change" and then it won't change again. Reality and truth don't change, our perceptions of reality and truth change. Reality and truth are absolutes. and what crazy logic brings you to that absurd conclusion. that is totally untrue. constant change is just that.... constant change. you may find a truth that does not change but you will never find all or even most truth unchanging. good luck with that quest. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Where do morals come from???
Edited by
Thorb
on
Thu 01/27/11 10:06 AM
|
|
Thorb:
What I mean is that ... story tellers made up our morals. If by "morals" you mean lessons about right/wrong behavior that are derived from a story, then I would agree that they made up the stories in order to teach a lesson. It does not follow from that that the lesson itself is necessarily man-made, although it may. I mean, we make up words to communicate ideas about things in and of the world and ourselves, however, it does not follow that we made up what we talk about. There is no universality outside of as someone stated...
It seems that there is no distinction being made here between a statement and what the statement corresponds to. The difference is pivotal. Universally speaking the above does not make much sense to me. I mean, it is a universal truth that humans must have sustenance or we will die. It is a universal truth that we all must be born in order to live. Likewise, one's current life on earth will end one day. The list goes on and on. None of those things, or any other universal truth for that matter, are contingent upon their being said. They are true regardless, because true statements simply reflect the state of affairs. The state of affairs is not necessarily affected by langauge, although it may be - if that state of affairs is a linguistic construct. Morality is no such thing. Morals grow and change with society
Agreed. in your first quote you play again with semantics ... words and meanings and our ability to communicate... Your logic through your retort is flawed and working on false similarity of ideas. in your second quote you take the statement out of context to answer it... that is called a strawman argument. not worth any consideration at all. the context is talking about morals ... the no universality refers to morals ... not everything as you answered ... but only morals. It should have been obvious to just about anyone. the third quote covers the gist of it all .... no universal morals exist. ... they are not static and change with time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Where do morals come from???
|
|
and the Moral of the story of Morality is .... semantics in such a way that that in itself breaks its universality. what makes morals..... story tellers. What I mean is that ... story tellers made up our morals. There is no universality outside of as someone stated... evolution of our societies as we expand our population to its peak. Morals grow and change with society |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
My Experiment with truth.
Edited by
Thorb
on
Wed 01/26/11 06:50 PM
|
|
The reality of truth about reality is that its not a static thing.
[that applies to both reality and truth] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Ramblings
|
|
out of hapinstance, I stumbled upon your tributaries
these flowing word ripples through the spaces ingestions of a moment's depth a frowning smile melds with that smiling frown undecided still, unstill decided to let it be known the things that been shown, rock, smoke, slide into home. I'll be check'n back and thanks for the journey's through your words. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Where do morals come from???
|
|
and the Moral of the story of Morality is .... semantics in such a way that that in itself breaks its universality.
what makes morals..... story tellers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Where do morals come from???
|
|
Thorb:
After reading some of the posts and the .... you can't equate morality to moral belief. I have to disagree with that statement completely. that is implying morals are some universal law ... like gravity. they are not. It implies no such thing about morals Thorb unless one holds that morals, moral belief, codes of behavior, and morality are one in the same thing. I do not hold such a position, and argue against it. the closest to a law morals comes is the will to survive. And has often shown that it trumps any moral beliefs we think we have.
We must not interchange morality and moral belief as though they are one in the same thing, because they clearly are not. Moral belief is relative to individual particulars and therefore changes along with different culture and upbringing, whereas morality underwrites them all equally. Morality is a combined set of universal human conditions that give rise to the individual particulars, they exist and apply to all cases, without exception. The difficulty is had in identifying what those universal conditions are. I put it to you that humanity has yet to have successfully done this, but rather we get closer and closer as our knowledge grows and is applied retrospectively to the things we once thought were true. Pointing out that there are/were differences in codes of conduct and/or moral belief does not tell us anything at all about morality. lol n... you say no and then go on and describe yes claiming morality is some universal human thing ... like a law .... ie like the law of gravity... how confusingly hypocritical of you. you may try to make it sound different by saying its universal conditions of humanity ... that have not been discovered ... but that is just a smoke screen for the original implication that its some universal law of humanity.... and it is not. the onis is on you to prove there is. extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my friends breast fed wherever , whenever ... all through the 70's and 80's when their kids where babies.
No biggie as far as I'm concerned ... its just these new uncultured people that make a fuss about it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Lost & Found
|
|
That's a lot of money ... and more likely to be missed than 20 bucks.
If I found 20 bucks ... it would depend where and who was around. A million ... I would take legal action to put a claim on it with a note that I expect at least a finder's fee. min. 1% but expecting 3 to 10 percent. ... or in what is standard. If a legal owner is not found within a reasonable time... all of it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
My Experiment with truth.
|
|
What stops people from speaking the truth all the time.
empathy for others feelings in a big one. not really knowing what the truth is, due to perception etc. is probably the biggest one. besides ... the truth changes like and with the time and you may think you are speaking the truth but you are slow or fast and get it wrong. so .... try as you may , to speak the truth always. under analysis you will find you failed. so ... cut out the word .. always ... and move to... as much as possible... then maybe... you won't fail so often. |
|
|
|
|
Previous
