Compassion and empathy

[cantata]

To relieve their suffering?

Why would I want to do that if I didn't care about their suffering?

Do you only think hatred is bad and love is good because you were taught it?

I'm sure there are biological reasons to feel these things too.

But I also think that what we are taught, directly and indirectly, has an enormous impact on us.

Were you not taught things that you have come to disagree with?

Yes, of course.

All considerably less fundamental things.

 

[Oneofthediaspora]

When you feel like smoking a cigarette, I take it that your desire not to smoke the cigarette, or your fear of the negative consequences of doing so, is stronger.

When you feel like lashing out at dawdling customers, I take it that your desire not to harm them, or your desire not to get arrested for assaulting consumers of flat-packed furniture, is stronger.

You do what you do because of how you feel. When you feel two or more things at once, the strongest feeling wins.

No. My ability to reason overrides my feelings. The intensity of the feeling is strong but the rational part of my mind aided by the grace of God can control my desires.
I think we may be using the word "feeling" in differing ways.

 

[cantata]

No. My ability to reason overrides my feelings. The intensity of the feeling is strong but the rational part of my mind aided by the grace of God can control my desires.
I think we may be using the word "feeling" in differing ways.

I concur.

When I say "feelings", I don't mean utter irrationality. Broadly speaking, my goals are to avoid pain and seek pleasure or happiness. I regard pain and happiness to be feelings. My reason serves these ends. Suppose I have a great urge to kick someone who is dawdling in front of me on my lunch break.

If I were to kick them:

+ Satisfaction --> Happiness
+ Chance of them getting out of the darned way --> I get more of my lunch break for reading --> Happiness

- Argument --> Awkward situation --> Pain
- Shame/guilt/empathy for unpleasant experience on part of kickee --> Pain
- May further delay lunch if person falls over/argument ensues --> Privation of happiness
- May get arrested --> Pain

Conclusion: Don't kick them.

 

[Chesterton]

I just know that I approve or disapprove of it, that it gives me a good or a bad feeling, that it has this or that effect in the world, and I make my "moral" judgement accordingly.

I hate to nitpick on language, but you’re describing a “preference” and not a “judgment” aren’t you? A judgment implies objectivity; we judge against a standard. You say you just like compassion. But it follows that if I have a preference for cruelty, my preference is objectively neither better nor worse than yours.

 

[cantata]

I hate to nitpick on language, but you’re describing a “preference” and not a “judgment” aren’t you? A judgment implies objectivity; we judge against a standard. You say you just like compassion. But it follows that if I have a preference for cruelty, my preference is objectively neither better nor worse than yours.

Sure, but at the time it feels like a judgement.

That's kind of my point. Everyone - including people who believe in objective morality - do this. So what we think of as moral judgements, as you rightly point out, come down to preferences.

p.s. It's perfectly possible to make a judgement in terms of pragmatism, by the way. If you have a desired goal you can make a judgement about the best way to achieve it.

 

[Chesterton]

Sure, but at the time it feels like a judgement.

That's kind of my point. Everyone - including people who believe in objective morality - do this. So what we think of as moral judgements, as you rightly point out, come down to preferences.

p.s. It's perfectly possible to make a judgement in terms of pragmatism, by the way. If you have a desired goal you can make a judgement about the best way to achieve it.

But if your idea of morality is true, then all actions are like flavors of ice cream; we can like some better than others, but we can’t say any or more right or wrong. But we all do say and believe things are right and wrong.

 

[OphidiaPhile]

[emphasis mine]
But why does that imply caring?
Protection and caring are different things.
Also, without emotions, other animals would only do you a favor when they saw a potential benefit from it. Like preserving a sizeable group. So, without emotions, the othe ape would feel no need to return the favor you completed for him. So, in order for the ape to care whether you did him a favor in the factoring of whether he will do one, he'd first have to care, to have emotion. So that is circular. So compassion isn't necessarily a good evolutionary item, along with other emotions(besides fear).

Occams Razor

It benefits a social structure there is no more to it than that.

 

[cantata]

But if your idea of morality is true, then all actions are like flavors of ice cream; we can like some better than others, but we can’t say any or more right or wrong. But we all do say and believe things are right and wrong.

We do. But we're incorrect in our assumptions. There is no objective standard. Simply believing that things are right or wrong doesn't make them so, you know.

 

[Chesterton]

We do. But we're incorrect in our assumptions. There is no objective standard. Simply believing that things are right or wrong doesn't make them so, you know.

Then why don't we tell it like it is? Why do we say "this is right or wrong", when what we actually mean is "I do or don't like this"?

 

[cantata]

Then why don't we tell it like it is? Why do we say "this is right or wrong", when what we actually mean is "I do or don't like this"?

Because most people believe that there is an objective standard, and that assumption is deeply ingrained in our language.

It is, however, an incorrect assumption, just like it was incorrect to assume that the world is flat.

 

[Chesterton]

Because most people believe that there is an objective standard, and that assumption is deeply ingrained in our language.

It is, however, an incorrect assumption, just like it was incorrect to assume that the world is flat.

Okay, then if I "feel" it is right to kill homosexuals, you can say you don't like that, but you've no standing to say I'm "wrong". My feeling that homosexuality should be eliminated from society is on exactly the same level as your feeling that you like chocolate ice cream (or whatever it is you like).

 

[corvus_corax]

Okay, then if I "feel" it is right to kill homosexuals, you can say you don't like that, but you've no standing to say I'm "wrong".

Correct
However, she and the rest of society are likewise free to oppose you. Such opposition may include incarceration and/or the death penalty.
You are free to feel whatever you want.
You are also free to act on your feelings.
But so are we. So is the rest of society (e.g. laws, consequences, ostracism, anger, death, etc etc etc)

My feeling that homosexuality should be eliminated from society is on exactly the same level as your feeling that you like chocolate ice cream (or whatever it is you like).

Sure, I can see that.
However, the rest of society is likewise free to feel that such actions (i.e. Killing homosexuals simply because they are homosexuals) deserve a consequence.

Now in some cultures, the population may actually agree with such actions, and you would suffer no jail time or any threat of a death sentence.

See?
Subjective. You, me, cantata, everyone on these boards, the Jewish laws outlined in the OT, multiple other cultures, etc.
Simple enough, yes?

 

[Atheista]

Compassion is a product of evolution and natural selection that we inherit thru our genes.

 

[Chesterton]

Correct
However, she and the rest of society are likewise free to oppose you. Such opposition may include incarceration and/or the death penalty.
You are free to feel whatever you want.
You are also free to act on your feelings.
But so are we. So is the rest of society (e.g. laws, consequences, ostracism, anger, death, etc etc etc)

Sure, I can see that.
However, the rest of society is likewise free to feel that such actions (i.e. Killing homosexuals simply because they are homosexuals) deserve a consequence.

Now in some cultures, the population may actually agree with such actions, and you would suffer no jail time or any threat of a death sentence.

See?
Subjective. You, me, cantata, everyone on these boards, the Jewish laws outlined in the OT, multiple other cultures, etc.
Simple enough, yes?

Okay, but I’m unsure what your point is. Majority rules? I agree, but that’s no evidence that what the majority decides is subjective; in fact, I think it tends to support the idea of objectivity.

 

[Nathan45]

Now this goes some way to providing an argument for Cantata as to how and why lying can be evolutionarily beneficial.
If you can fool other people into believing that you are compassionate and loyal then you can reap the benefits.

True, but it's a lot easier to be it than fake it. It's not like real compassion doesn't exist.

And I'm not going to argue that there are a lot of people who don't have compassion but fake it for social reasons, i mean it's obvious there are a lot of people like that.

 

[Braunwyn]

Okay, then if I "feel" it is right to kill homosexuals, you can say you don't like that, but you've no standing to say I'm "wrong". My feeling that homosexuality should be eliminated from society is on exactly the same level as your feeling that you like chocolate ice cream (or whatever it is you like).

I'm wondering what role suffering plays here. Sure, morality/ethics/compassion can be subjective but can we agree that beings suffer?

Okay, but I’m unsure what your point is. Majority rules? I agree, but that’s no evidence that what the majority decides is subjective; in fact, I think it tends to support the idea of objectivity.

There is no way for a subjective being to perceive objectivity or to take an objective position.

 

[Nathan45]

Of course it doesn't. It doesn't see anything. Genes are concerned with surviving. That's what they do.
Why do you and I admire compassion and loyalty though?

probably because we don't like being spat on or stabbed in the back.

Regardless of how we act ourselves, we'd all prefer to surround ourselves with loyal and compassionate people rather than the opposite, would you agree?

 

[cantata]

Okay, then if I "feel" it is right to kill homosexuals, you can say you don't like that, but you've no standing to say I'm "wrong".

Absolutely. I'm glad you understand.

What I can do, by the way, is try to show you that your position is internally inconsistent. Suppose you think that killing is wrong. Then I can say to you that you are being hypocritical if you think that killing homosexuals is right. Of course, I can't make you care either about homosexuals or about being consistent in your views, but we can still have a reasonable discussion if we share at least some common goals (such as, for example, the desire for a healthy, happy society, or the desire to have internally consistent views).

My feeling that homosexuality should be eliminated from society is on exactly the same level as your feeling that you like chocolate ice cream (or whatever it is you like).

Well, not really, because I'd imagine that such a view is much more deeply held and psychologically significant to you than someone's preference for a particular flavour of frozen dessert.

You are attempting to make my position look absurd by trivialising "moral" feelings. However, they are not trivial feelings. They are at the very heart of human discourse. The fact that we do not have an external standard by which to judge them doesn't change their importance. The love that I feel for my parents is a much more significant feeling to me than my fondness for my beautiful new iPod. Likewise, my feeling that killing homosexuals is horrible is much more significant to me than my enjoyment of chocolatey goodness.

 

[quatona]

If compassion is good, does that mean that autism is evil?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070504121241.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071106123725.htm

A dysfunction of the mirror neurons is related to the impaired social interaction of autism.

Do mirror neurons have "freewill"? And - if they do - can we have "freewill"?

 

[Wyzaard]

So how did we evolve it? When?

Primates evolved social traits long ago; a basic level of collectivity and/or mutual aid allowed them to thrive without being physically powerful. When our ancestors moved into the savannas 7 million years ago, the presence of more adept predators and prey on this open landscape pushed these social traits towards complex communications, planning, and cooperative bonding.

Namely, why do we have feelings and a monkey doesn't?

Who says monkeys don't have feelings? Not nearly as complicated as out own perhaps, but they do care for one another to some degree.