How is it consistent to criticize the left for hating America AND not having an objective morality ?

[Hammster]

Prisons as they exist in the US are immoral, which I stated clearly.

Yeah, and you assume that what you propose somehow makes them better. However, your basic premise is still in effect. Let’s change some things in your quote.

“Actions intended to cause undesirable things to happen to people is immoral. Subjugating someone as a prisoner is undesirable to that person. Therefore, prison is immoral.”

Rehabilitation doesn’t change that.

 

[Hans Blaster]

[edit: Nevermind. I didn't realize which stupid thread I was browsing. I don't want to be in this conversation.]

 

[gaara4158]

Yeah, and you assume that what you propose somehow makes them better. However, your basic premise is still in effect. Let’s change some things in your quote.

“Actions intended to cause undesirable things to happen to people is immoral. Subjugating someone as a prisoner is undesirable to that person. Therefore, prison is immoral.”

Rehabilitation doesn’t change that.

I wouldn’t characterize rehabilitation-focused internment as subjugation per se. Depends how it’s executed. There are prisons in Scandinavia and Western Europe that are more like spas than our prisons. You can make an argument as to why that’s still immoral, but you can’t equivocate it with slavery.

 

[Bradskii]

It was a certain level of extreme hurt to which I was referring, that and only that.

Or don't you understand the term "fatal"?

So 'a level of extreme hurt' as in fatal? You certainly play a rough game of uncle where you come from - 'Your honour, I appreciate the prosecution's reference to the (ahem) UUMP© but I would submit to the court that the deceased was himself at fault for not calling out 'uncle' as my client was beating him with the tyre iron.'

Was this realisation that people didn't like being killed come as some sort of epiphany for you? Did all your book learning' get you to this deep and meaningfull principle?

 

[Hammster]

I wouldn’t characterize rehabilitation-focused internment as subjugation per se. Depends how it’s executed. There are prisons in Scandinavia and Western Europe that are more like spas than our prisons. You can make an argument as to why that’s still immoral, but you can’t equivocate it with slavery.

As long as someone can say it’s undesirable, I can call it immoral based on your standards.

 

[gaara4158]

As long as someone can say it’s undesirable, I can call it immoral based on your standards.

They’d have to argue that the end doesn’t justify the means, where our hypothetical specifically has the ends justifying them. They couldn’t do it.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

So 'a level of extreme hurt' as in fatal? You certainly play a rough game of uncle where you come from - 'Your honour, I appreciate the prosecution's reference to the Universal Principle but I would submit to the court that the deceased was himself at fault for not calling out 'uncle' as my client was beating him with the tyre iron.'

Like I said earlier, you keep strawmanning me and, apparently, you can't help but to keep failing to read what I actually said all those many posts back. I mean, I do understand. For some people, what I've said may be difficult to comeprehend, but even if that's the case I only assume it'll be about 4 or 5 % of the population who will have this sort of cognitive problem (i.e. the sociopaths/psycopaths, and others with related psychological impairments), which is exactly the point.

And let me clarify something here so you can get a better handle on what my original context was, Mr. Smart-acres, since apparently you're having some personal problems with the work of interpretation:

​

The instance of 'CRY UNCLE' I was speaking about wasn't a game. It was a maneuver APPLIED to ME to shut me up; it was unilaterally done to me, and I had no recourse to defend myself. ​

Now, do you understand, or are you still having problems wrapping your mind around what I'm saying?

You see, the crux of my point with the principle is that it can be recognized very often even by those who are sociopathic, because if presented with the situation where the same thing they do to others is done to them, they'll cry out and beg for their lives just the same as will the other 96 to 97% percent do. Hence, it's rational then for anyone to conclude that---because most of us will conclude this--that we then shouldn't torture and/or murder other people. And we all really know this by proxy, all except for that last partial percentage point of the population who is beyond help.

So, that leaves us with a problem. Some people still either murder or start wars? There must be some other force at work in the world. I'd call that force, "Satan," but you can call it whatever you darn well please.

Was this realisation that people didn't like being killed come as some sort of epiphany for you? Did all your book learning' get you to this deep and meaningfull principle?

No, I came to this realization about 35 years ago after growning up in a not so educated, dysfunctional, and occasionaly sociopathically prone extended family. Of course, putting words to what should have been child's play came difficultly at first, but the mutedness I experienced was partly alleviated by studying in an Intro to Philosophy class I took in 1991.

 

[Bradskii]

Of course, putting words to what should have been child's play...

There is no 'should have been'. It's a simple natural instinct. Putting words to it IS child's play. In fact, it's not required to put into words as it's a basic assumption for any moral principle. It's a given. It's not even specifically human...

'My principle makes it a UNIVERSAL FACT that if someone tells me that physical torture is wrong because they've exprienced physical torture and/or bodily harm, then I will at the very least make a substantial note of that in my mind as a source of authority.'

We're looking after the grandkids today. I just asked my grandson if hurting him for no reason was ok. He said no. And why? Because it hurts. Followed by a puzzled look, as if to say 'why ask such an obvious question?'

Your (ahem) UUMP© is something that doesn't even need explaining to a nine year old.

Aim higher.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

There is no 'should have been'. It's a simple natural instinct. Putting words to it IS child's play. In fact, it's not required to put into words as it's a basic assumption for any moral principle. It's a given. It's not even specifically human...

'My principle makes it a UNIVERSAL FACT that if someone tells me that physical torture is wrong because they've exprienced physical torture and/or bodily harm, then I will at the very least make a substantial note of that in my mind as a source of authority.'

We're looking after the grandkids today. I just asked my grandson if hurting him for no reason was ok. He said no. And why? Because it hurts. Followed by a puzzled look, as if to say 'why ask such an obvious question?'

Your (ahem) UUMP© is something that doesn't even need explaining to a nine year old.

Aim higher.

So then, WE CAN AGREE with each other that the UUMP, as a bare, bare minimum, isn't merely on a 1st order of subjective thinking. It's objectively universal.

Thanks for helping me to objectively point out what should be obvious to nearly everyone. Nice Job!

Now. With that out of the way, which Ethical System is the one that we all have to absolutely abide by, Bradskii? The one that the strong LEFT or RIGHT proffers?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

There is no 'should have been'. It's a simple natural instinct. Putting words to it IS child's play. In fact, it's not required to put into words as it's a basic assumption for any moral principle. It's a given. It's not even specifically human...

'My principle makes it a UNIVERSAL FACT that if someone tells me that physical torture is wrong because they've exprienced physical torture and/or bodily harm, then I will at the very least make a substantial note of that in my mind as a source of authority.'

We're looking after the grandkids today. I just asked my grandson if hurting him for no reason was ok. He said no. And why? Because it hurts. Followed by a puzzled look, as if to say 'why ask such an obvious question?'

Your (ahem) UUMP© is something that doesn't even need explaining to a nine year old.

Aim higher.

How about the moral implications of Darwinism? Do you think you need to explain this to your nine year old grandson?

Or have you refrained from doing so, Bradskii?

 

[Bradskii]

How about the moral implications of Darwinism? Do you think you need to explain this to your nine year old grandson?

Or have you refrained from doing so, Bradskii?

If you want to discuss the implications of evolution on human characteristics and how they reference9 a sense ofmorality then you'd best refer to it by that name. And the kid knows more about the process at nine than a lot of people in this forum have any hope of understanding. What you apparently took a few years to figure out, he counts as common knowledge.

 

[Bradskii]

So then, WE CAN AGREE with each other that the UUMP, as a bare, bare minimum, isn't merely on a 1st order of subjective thinking. It's objectively universal.

Quite right. It's on par with that other universal principle: BIAO.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

If you want to discuss the implications of evolution on human characteristics and how they reference9 a sense ofmorality then you'd best refer to it by that name. And the kid knows more about the process at nine than a lot of people in this forum have any hope of understanding. What you apparently took a few years to figure out, he counts as common knowledge.

Oh. I see.
... so you're saying that your grandson is ready to follow in Peter Singer's footsteps and more or less become a vegetarian?

 

[Bradskii]

Oh. I see.
... so you're saying that your grandson is ready to follow in Peter Singer's footsteps and more or less become a vegetarian?

I'm saying that he probably understands more about evolution than you do.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I'm saying that he probably understands more about evolution than you do.

Now, now, Bradskii. Tsk, Tsk! Play fair.

 

[Ken-1122]

I wonder if anyone’s ever made a movie where that happens in the first scene…

A movie where Americans buy slaves from Africa, just to set them free? No.

 

[Ken-1122]

...you like to learn? So, from whom have you learned the most, Ken? Which teachers, mentors, authors have come to mean the most to you?

For what I do know, it's provisional. I believe truth is provisional.

Unfortunately, there are folks who can defend their postions no matter what anyone says.

Why do you find that unfortunate? I would love to run into someone with an opposing view that can do that!

To nudge people back toward Jesus Christ ... that's why I'm even on CF in the first place. What else would my first priority be?

Ahh so you have an agenda! The problem I’ve found with people with such an agenda is they will often get frustrated, even becoming hostile when they fail to convert others to their way of thinking; they see it as a waste of their time if you don’t eventually agree with them.

Education. Preferrably, a well-rounded one that leads people out of their overly autonomous, nihilistically, emotively, solipsistically perpetuated delusions.

So what on Earth are you doing here? Do you really expect to get the type of education you seek in discussion forms like this one?

Pesonally, I don't. All I've done so far is tell you how I divide out a concept of 'truth' from another concept of 'Truth.'

Truth is not a concept; and you don’t change the definition of words by capitalizing the first letter; Truth and truth are the same thing.

'truth' is provisional. 'Truth' isn't.


"Reality" is the world in which we exist; it's vast, other and beyond our full knowledge and control. Many of us don't like this fact because we want to be our own "measuring rods."

By contrast, 'truth' is a speech act (or set of speech acts) which attempts to approximate a representative but always incomplete articulation about what it is we 'think' we're engaging with in the world around us.

I have no idea what you are talking about; it’s almost like we’re speaking a different language or something; you’ve lost me on that one bruh!

 

[Ken-1122]

Fairness in outcome or opportunity?

What do you mean by “fairness of outcome”?

What if someone disagrees?

I explain to them why they are wrong.

How do you know if your measuring stick is accurate?

I always assume my measuring stick is accurate, until proven otherwise. How do you know your measuring stick is accurate?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

For what I do know, it's provisional. I believe truth is provisional.

Right. Our speech-acts of 'truth' are provisional, just like historical descriptions about the past are provisional.

Why do you find that unfortunate? I would love to run into someone with an opposing view that can do that!

I don't usually bump into anyone who disagrees with me on nearly everything. No, it's the rare contrarian (or closeted Satanist or Nihilist) who typically does so. Surely, you and I can find something other than a few trivial things to agree about (?)

Ahh so you have an agenda! The problem I’ve found with people with such an agenda is they will often get frustrated, even becoming hostile when they fail to convert others to their way of thinking; they see it as a waste of their time if you don’t eventually agree with them.

Yes. I have a Christian agenda! And I express it on a Christian public forum of all things. It's shocking and scandalous, I know.

So what on Earth are you doing here? Do you really expect to get the type of education you seek in discussion forms like this one?

In addition to nudging others involuntarily toward Jesus, I'm also pro-Education. I'm all about helping others learn their lessons.

Truth is not a concept; and you don’t change the definition of words by capitalizing the first letter; Truth and truth are the same thi

Au contraire mon frère! Words do change meaning, depending on how we use them and explain them. But of course, you know this already.

I have no idea what you are talking about; it’s almost like we’re speaking a different language or something; you’ve lost me on that one bruh!

That's alright if you don't understand me. I'm sure that with some focus and attention, you'll learn some things as we go.

 

[Ken-1122]

Right. Our speech-acts of 'truth' are provisional, just like historical descriptions about the past are provisional.

Opps! I made a huge mistake! I accidentally copied and pasted the wrong response to your answer. On post #670 you asked me

...you like to learn? So, from whom have you learned the most, Ken? Which teachers, mentors, authors have come to mean the most to you?

And I accidentally pasted a response that was not meant for you; a response that had nothing to do with the question you asked; a claim that I believe truth is provisional; which I don’t. the reply I should have given you was

The type of learning I seek is not the type you get from teachers, mentors, or authors; the learning I seek is from every day people like you and others on forms like this who disagree with me. I’m not learning about things I know nothing about, I’m learning about opposing views concerning subjects I already know about. I like to learn their perspective and why they believe as they do.

That’s the response I should have given you; please respond to that.

I don't usually bump into anyone who disagrees with me on nearly everything. No, it's the rare contrarian (or closeted Satanist or Nihilist) who typically does so. Surely, you and I can find something other than a few trivial things to agree about (?)

Oh I’m sure 90% of the stuff you and I will agree on as with anyone. But I get more by discussing topics where we disagree; that’s how I learn.

Yes. I have a Christian agenda! And I express it on a Christian public forum of all things. It's shocking and scandalous, I know.

No; I ain’t thrown any shame at cha; It’s just that I’ve run into those looking to convert and it often ends in them getting mad because I don’t convert. Thus far you don’t appear to be that type (thankfully)

In addition to nudging others involuntarily toward Jesus, I'm also pro-Education. I'm all about helping others learn their lessons.

So… you’re here to teach? Are you only looking to teach? Or are you also willing to learn.