Ethics = completely pointless

For Gods sake.

I know what makes a society work... i'm not an idiot. I have never said that i don't like society.. or want to it thrive... BUT arguing that we "should" be concerned and preventative just because it encourages a productive society does not make sense.

Do you not understand the existentialist and nihilistic arguments? You need a basis for this objective morality. Sadly, there is no basis. Therefore there is no such thing as wrong and right.

It is ignorant of you to assume that because i don't believe in an objective morality i am a budding mass murderer. I'm not full of hate.. i do not want to kill people... but that does not mean i think anyone can determine whether or not it is okay to kill people.

It is all relative.

and i suggest that everyone watches this short clip:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=yY5r_zox-a8

Two quotes from the video:

"There are people all over the world who are killing each other over who has the right reality tunnel"

"If you let other people define reality for you then you are living in hell. When you create your own reality you are living in heaven"

The titles of the video is "Who is the master who makes the grass green".... which refers to us as individuals making our own reality and knowledge. Things are what we say they are. If everyone is an individual then nothing is fact.. just opinion.

People can live in a civilised society without objective morality, it's just that they don't have to.

Also, when people claim to have objective truth and morality it causes conflict.. because claims are different all over the world. A society that is agnostic about everything really has the potential to be peaceful.

 

Also, claiming to have knowledge of a universal moral code is the same as claiming there is art that is better than other art. Music that is better than other music.

It is meaningless to say that one musician is better than another because everyone interprets music differently. There is no such thing as good music... only different tastes.

Neither can we say that one act is any better than any other act. It is all just personal opinion.

 

What about the moral code: not to be wicked. Anticipate the life ahead as if it had every form of improvisation you could dream of. Of course, we might the find the code of living: that we shoudl every moment as if it were our last too tormenting or just plain gullible (wicked).

Ahaaa...h (the Polish guy gets that again... I'll reject that soon in favour of the improving the improving b-sequence of Time).

 

what?

 

I guess you're going along the lines of nihilism?

 

So in summary: Just because there isn't any objective, all-encompassing moral code that applies to everyone the same way doesn't mean that we're exempt from having our own personal ethical beliefs. The ethical beliefs that are "right" are the ones that serve you the best. I find goodness to serve me the best.

 

"A point in every direction is the same as no point at all"

 

Not true, atheists and christians both get their morality from their innate conscious, and are solidified in our society by laws, the bill of rights etc.

Are you seriously telling me people didn't know it was wrong to steal or murder before Moses delivered the 10 commandments? Really? And apparently these people would continue to think rape and slavery was OK in that case since they weren't listed as part of them. Yeah according to the bible, saying god damn is worse than having my own sex slave. Come on, give the human race a little credit.

we don't get our morality from religion, it's darwinism, it's human nature to be nice to each other because it's mutually beneficial, we're social creatures, it helped us evolve and move out of the jungle. If anything religion just gets in the way of our morality, gives people an excuse to do bad things. Often times it's religion that is subjective.

Our morality is constantly evolving and changing with the times, and religion looks a little more dated each and every year. Slavery, racism, homosexuality, all issues we are addressing by ourselves, religion has no say in the matter. How could we be capable of such thoughts if religion hasn't told us to do it? Well the answer is that it's not possible, clearly we can decide what is good and what is bad on our own.

 

I'll have to keep an eye out for your posts

Good

Good as well

While I agree with the main point of your post as I understood it, I feel that the growing complexity of human interaction as well as individual psychology calls for a bit more than an evolutionary approach to address accurately. Also, society continues to prosper with anti-socials/immorally acting individuals in it, so perhaps the decision to live peaceably with others could be somewhat more than instinctual. I did go over, though, psychological theories where selfless behavior is seen as the result of one's instinct to see their family/race/species survive.



I feel that the line is becoming blurred between ethics and social contract in this thread. What I know of ethics is more complex than "Is it wrong to murder?" and is more the act of weighing between two hard options and judging which would best be undertaken. This isn't the best example of what I mean, but it is one of my favorites anyway:

 

Clearly, that's what we've been doing but just as clearly, just taking a look around us, we haven't been doing a very good job of deciding what is good and what is bad.

 

Common sense again, eh?

Just looking around, my life is pretty great, so clearly I and my family and John Logie Baird have been doing something right.

 

You're absolutely right.

But considering that we're dealing with humans, there are certain *given* truths. Nobody likes pain, nobody wants their stuff stolen, nobody likes to be enslaved, etc.

But there's always an exception to the rule. We lock up mass murderers cuz we don't know what else to do with em, we justify stealing from multi-billionaires, and we cause pain to prevent pain.

That's the great thing about realizing true ethics. It depends on who they believe they are and how they believe the world is. It leads to the most beautiful drama called life.

 

I agree that the only absolutes are individual pleasure and pain. It can be effectively argued that not causing others pain and working towards greater collective pleasure serves oneself more than short-sighted selfishness, however the extent that such a philosophy maximizes pleasure and minimizes pain remains specific to one's situation and personal conscience. Therefore there is no reasonable ethical code other than that the individual adopts for their self. Having said that, there seems to be a high occurrence of intersubjectivity which creates the illusion of universal truths, but in reality they are not universal. What of the true sadist who can get away with hurting others? Surely "do no harm to others" is a poor ethical doctrine for him.

 

Basically, the second you try to maximise another person's pleasure, you run the risk of failing to do so, causing yourself and possibly them greater discomfort (through cognitive dissonance, physical pain, or physical harm).

On the other hand, if one simply minds one's own business, even only attempting to maintain a constant level of happiness, one can still feel guilty if there is social inequality.

Ethics is an attempt to make this situation less horrible.

 

I think that the threadstarter meant that absolute ethics were pointless, and they are. Nobody would be silly enough to believe that ethical philosophy is pointless. At least I hope they wouldn't be.

 

I wouldn't say it's pointless, but all it really amounts to is a set of assumptions. I think Ethics is cited by those who just want to bolster their own intuitive opinion almost as much as God or Science.

 

Who said anything about common sense?

Personally, I have great life, although some would say anyone saying so is being entirely subjective.

Also just because someone buries his head in the sand so he doesn't see what's going on doesn't mean that the barrier reefs aren't dying, that the oceans haven't become a giant waste dump for mankind's pollution and the animals in the oceans aren't being fished to extinction and that's just the oceans. Clearly someone is making some bad choices or are you one of those that think these are the results of good choices or just the cycle of life.

 

What a cynical view of life you have, I bet your alot of fun at childrens birthday parties.

 

Cynical? Realistic, perhaps, cynical no. Just because I believe that mankind has been really stupid and has brought mankind to the brink of destruction, doesn't mean there is no hope for the future. It's only people, who don't believe there is a God and have to depend on the idiocy of mankind to save them, that are truly hopeless.

 

Pain is the gift which makes pleasure so treasured