Comments on Clotted Cognition: Is this ivory tower accessible?

Liesl:You wrote: "I think we need to differentiate...

2008-05-13T05:23:11.185-05:00

Liesl:

You wrote: "I think we need to differentiate between actual harm (physical) and perceived harm (mental). We don't prosecute people for mentally abusing others, but we do for physical abuse. Why do we expect people to treat us with respect? Do we inherently deserve it because we're human? are there degrees of respect? I haven't wandered through this line of reasoning to my own satisfaction yet. What do you think?"

Wow, good question. I don't know what I think yet, except that I'd like to see this question discussed more somewhere.

"there is nothing that works on all people in all situations in all ways when confronted with an ethical quandary"

How does this relate to the idea that morality is absolute? Can morality be absolute if people are infinitely variable?

WV Techie:It might be better to say that science g...

2008-04-27T13:55:53.707-05:00

WV Techie:

It might be better to say that science gives us empirical evidence, something philosophy never can accomplish. Either way, the differences between the two are vast. While we may not consider gravity to be proven, we can never prove that ethics exist. We can demonstrate the effects of gravity, so we know it is something which exists, right? There is a reason for the reaction to action. The same cannot ever be said for philosophy. We can speculate about why people act in certain ways, but the fact that there is nothing that works on all people in all situations in all ways when confronted with an ethical quandary guarantees that there is no way to prove that the thing we think is provable. There is nothing that can be shown.

Huan: But the intrusiveness of laws are only suppo...

2008-04-27T13:48:39.801-05:00

Huan: But the intrusiveness of laws are only supposed to go so far as they protect as a society and individual. The individual protection is less important than the societal protection. The collective always wins, even when revolution is what is sought.

Liesl said:That is the difference between faith an...

2008-04-27T12:53:30.002-05:00

Liesl said:

That is the difference between faith and science; science proves that which exists, whether we believe in it or not.

Umm, I'm afraid that science doesn't "prove" anything. With the scientific method things can only be disproved -- the first time a European saw a black swan in China, the hypothesis held by Europeans at the time that all swans are white was shown to be wrong. The hypothesis that all of the universe is filled with "aether" which is needed for the propagation of light was disproved by the famous Michelson-Morley experiment.

All the experimental results that support a hypothesis give us reasons to believe it is true, but no experimental result or set of results, no matter how large, ever "proves" that it is true. All scientific hypotheses, all scientific theories, even very successful ones like the theory of gravity or quantum mechanics, remain unproven forever.

firstly to protect us from each othersecondly to c...

2008-04-27T10:05:36.735-05:00

firstly to protect us from each other
secondly to collect from us funds to do the first
thirdly to regulate us for supposedly our best interest

the further you go down the list the more intrusive laws become

What reason do you see for the making of laws?

2008-04-25T20:02:45.680-05:00

What reason do you see for the making of laws?

i understand that many laws are written with a mor...

2008-04-25T19:09:41.253-05:00

i understand that many laws are written with a moral intent, this still does not make legality equal morality.

"it doesn't. when judging whether an act is moral ...

2008-04-25T14:09:05.241-05:00

"it doesn't. when judging whether an act is moral or not, both consequences and intent should be considered, but neither alone makes an act moral."

I agree. But you can't condemn something as immoral based solely on the thing itself. You have to take both things into consideration. Does the fact that the people of this country once had a mistaken idea of morality change the fact that the desire for the greater good may have been behind the specifics of that morality? Of course not, but it also does not excuse it. The fact remains, their actions were based on a morality, though not on the morality that recognizes equality.

"intention of morality does not equals morality"it...

2008-04-25T12:17:34.509-05:00

"intention of morality does not equals morality"

it doesn't. when judging whether an act is moral or not, both consequences and intent should be considered, but neither alone makes an act moral.

Oh, you so wish I was wrong so that you can be rig...

2008-04-25T00:11:57.591-05:00

Oh, you so wish I was wrong so that you can be right. Sucks to be you! Besides, you know there is tremendous irony in our arguing opposite sides of the intent/consequence idea.

or you can just accept that the association betwee...

2008-04-24T10:02:53.121-05:00

or you can just accept that the association between legality and morality is associative but not definitive and leave it a that.

when confronted with good data contrary to your preconception, shouldn't you abandon preconception?

just accept that you were wrong.

just admit it. it won't be bad. i won't think any worse of you. maybe even more of you.

"intention of morality does not equals morality"Mo...

2008-04-24T09:32:09.335-05:00

"intention of morality does not equals morality"

Morality doesn't change with the tides or the times or the culture if it exists, right? How, then, do we explain the fact that our laws, which are based on morality, do change? Could it possibly be that people are mistaken, but their intentions are not, in themselves, wrong? Of course, it could also be that there have been some morally reprehensible laws, right? But that doesn't change the fact that the laws themselves are based on morality, even if the morality they are based on is mistaken.

intention of morality does not equals moralitydid ...

2008-04-24T08:06:01.997-05:00

intention of morality does not equals morality

did you just admit that criminality doesn't equate morality?

"wow, you sure invest alot of faith in the legal s...

2008-04-23T21:21:11.381-05:00

"wow, you sure invest alot of faith in the legal system."

Where'd you get that from my last comment?

"event to the extent of generating tenuous reason and consequences."

How so?

"try this one:
in many states, it is illegal to have consensual sodomy between two adults. is this immoral as well?"

Of course not. However, the intention behind it is moral and the goal is moral. What is the reason for legislating sodomy?

"is morality temporal?
does it change geographically?
variable based on culture?"

Nope, nope, nope.

wow, you sure invest alot of faith in the legal sy...

2008-04-23T20:51:17.399-05:00

wow, you sure invest alot of faith in the legal system.

event to the extent of generating tenuous reason and consequences.

try this one:
in many states, it is illegal to have consensual sodomy between two adults. is this immoral as well?

50 years ago, it was illegal for colored folks to sit in front in a bus. was it immoral for them to get front row seats in the bus?

is morality temporal?
does it change geographically?
variable based on culture?

yay for moral relativity!

"is it immoral to speed?"Sure it is. The potential...

2008-04-23T14:46:37.375-05:00

"is it immoral to speed?"

Sure it is. The potential for harm is very much there, whether harm occurs or not.

"i don't think being illegal is being immoral."

Example? are there laws that are not based on morality? I can't think of one, but I am not trying terribly hard.

some has suggested that physical harm is unaccepta...

2008-04-23T10:41:42.410-05:00

some has suggested that physical harm is unacceptable but that mental harm is tolerable.

is sleep depravation mental harm?
what about waterboarding?

@esha
is it immoral to speed?

i don't think being illegal is being immoral.

Esha:I just wrote a long comment and deleted it be...

2008-04-21T15:43:11.300-05:00

Esha:

I just wrote a long comment and deleted it because I wasn't satisfied with it. I think we need to differentiate between actual harm (physical) and perceived harm (mental). We don't prosecute people for mentally abusing others, but we do for physical abuse. Why do we expect people to treat us with respect? Do we inherently deserve it because we're human? are there degrees of respect? I haven't wandered through this line of reasoning to my own satisfaction yet. What do you think?

I think all crimes can be classified as moral...bu...

2008-04-21T11:18:07.377-05:00

I think all crimes can be classified as moral...but wait, back to what I was originally getting at, which is can we have certain expectations of people even when they are not in our control, as you said in a comment above?

Murder is more than a betrayal as it is a crime ag...

2008-04-20T22:04:51.773-05:00

Murder is more than a betrayal as it is a crime against biology. If you take away the one thing we are and force the biological process to end artificially, you're violating more than a moral code.

How about expecting people to live by a moral code...

2008-04-20T19:52:21.683-05:00

How about expecting people to live by a moral code? Say a person does something that harms another, like murders them, even though we expect people not to murder--is that classifiable as the kind of betrayal you're talking about?

"faith is not enough to change, or enact change."I...

2008-04-19T11:36:31.245-05:00

"faith is not enough to change, or enact change."

I know, that was my point, or part of it.

"the root of unhappiness is the increasing disparity between expectation and perception."

I agree. It's a terrible thing to expect things of others when we have no control (nor should we) of their actions or motivations. I think it is the root of betrayal. In the end, the person who feels the betrayal is almost more at fault because the person doing the betraying is simply acting as they would. The expectations were unreasonable. That doesn't excuse the betrayer, just puts the emphasis back on our own responsibilities.

My ivory tower is right for everyone. But only if they smell nice.

faith is not enough to change, or enact change.can...

2008-04-18T16:11:25.284-05:00

faith is not enough to change, or enact change.

can you choose faith? or just allow it to happen?
can you choose love? or just allow it to happen.

the problem with ivory tower is when you think this is the way it ought to be for others as well. and the first seed of that is thinking that it is a charmed life to be living in an ivory tower.

but ofcourse i wish you an even more charmed life.

the root of unhappiness is the increasing disparity between expectation and perception.