[CP5670]

Until some new religion reinstates morals. If morals sprung from rational laws, whats to stop them from forming again?

Because the laws and the technology are now in place. I said this several times already: the laws will be the new morals at this time.

Isn't that what i post?

A slight variation; your post (as I read it) was more to the effect that the morals were consciously invented as a group of laws to ensure the survival of mankind as a whole, while I thought that they gradually came up over many thousand years from situations of individual survival.

Besides, who knows what to believe. Ever watch a movie called "The Matrix?" I mean we could be like that. For all we know we could be some superbeing's science project. We could be a disease on this world. We can be like viruses feeding off of this planet, reproducing at an amazing rate, and exploding out into space searching for new hosts. If u start to think about all the explanations honestly, u would relize that none of them is truly false. If u do see them as false, most likely, ur view is tainted.

Some are more likely then others though if we assume the fundamental rules of logic and some problem-solving methods; they are not all of the same probability.

That is a matter of opinions not ethics. Their opinion is that the US is evil, ours is not. Simple as that.

Ethics are just as much opinions too, if you think about it.

chimpanses will show greafe and sorrow for dead members of there groupe, they defend injured and weak members, they share, they form frendships and rivals based on past behavior, and they return favors.

Well, they only "grieve" for their closest family members, and they are much, much more likely to get into a deadly fight with other chimps than humans are. (especially if the other guy has some food or something; they do not share as humans might)

there is a religus overhead but it is all controled and moved by low level emotional instincts

Which is precisely what ethics are controlled by.

ethics are seperate from religon and are instinctive, people will still love and hate and fear and care after the fall of religon

The majority of the ethics we are speaking of here are most certainly not instinctual; there are a few basic rules that humans started off with, but most of the things we see today were created by procedures similar to those which I stated earlier. Also, I guess one could argue that religion is indirectly formed from instinct as well to some extent because of the main purposes of religion I gave earlier and the fact that the human species displays the unsatisfaction behavior, which makes it necessary for something to fulfil those purposes. These moral rules will stay on for quite a bit longer than religion, but ethics must fall too later on for the reasons I gave before.

I don't understand this; why do people say that religion is all illogical and then cling to ethics more closely than they would any religion? at least be consistent...

[Megadude]

why do people say that religion is all illogical

1. heaven
2. god
3. hell
4. creation in 7 (or was it 6 coz  i've no idea) days
5. have u read the crucible by Arthur Miller? Read that book and it angers u
6. what more do i neeed to say?


Also, religions try to  give explanation for the unknown.  That means it's ficticous, created to suit someone's purpose, to make some one feel better about themselves, to give them a sense of purpose.  I have no such needs.

People use to believe in wiches (Salem, massacusetts in 1600-1700's).  Now they don't.  I think more and more, such things will drop.

[CP5670]

The ethics have similar problems though. I quite agree with some of the ethics as being general guidelines that may or may not work in specific situations but are usually applicable to human affairs in the long run. Most of them can indeed be derived from the starting assumptions, but this is not how people obey them; they follow these rules blindly and ungrudgingly, just like with any religion. Following anything unquestioningly like this is a road to ignorance. (add this to the fact that they both involve lots of emotional thought in the way people follow them, which tends to really skew absolute logic)

[Megadude]

Ethics, i think is derived, as i posted earlier, from the will to survive.  I already said advanced species care about more things and thus greatly expand his will to survive to the things to care about.  Most people have similar interests, so they band together and form laws.  I think ethics are already ingrained into our minds.  The earliest animals have ethics, but at a lower level.  They don't have the mind to do what an intelligent mind (ours being the basis) might do.  We started small, but eventually we added and added till we have what we have now.  It was always about survival and our enhanced view of it.

[CP5670]

But in that case the same principle would apply to everything, and therefore religion and just about anything really would also be contributing to our survival. As I said, it is not the original ethical rules themselves that will fade away (others will, though), but the almost religious manner in which people follow them.

[Megadude]

I've already stopped following it religously.  Most of the people in the world have.  Most business men have.  I admit, the world is not an ethical place anymore, it's becoming more selfish.  I see so many examples each day that i have become a very very cynical person.

I'm not arguing that people are following ethics religously, because i know most don't.  I'm just arguing that living in an a completely ethicless socirty is impossible.  It will never disappear as some religions might (i.e. the Greeks or the Romans).

[CP5670]

Well, from what I have seen, most people do indeed follow them like strict rules, and the younger generation of today is especially being influenced by moralistic ideas. A society without morals will have the laws instead, and these would have been rationally deduced and proven from the starting assumptions. (basically, there will be no cultural conditioning in the human brain that emotionally prevents it from doing immoral things) Also, very, very far into the future, when humans would have essentially combined into one organism, there would be need for neither ethics nor laws.

[Megadude]

consider this, CP.  How many people download music from the internet?  All of those have stopped following ethics religously.  I bet most people would cheat a little.

When i say stop following ethics religously, i talk about small harmless stuff.  When u say, it's as if ethics is falling apart.

Sorry, if i'm sort of incomprehensible.  It's getting late.

[CP5670]

eh...that isn't so much of an ethic as a contemporary corporate restriction (and since it is very recent, it definitely has not had time to work its way into the cultural system); these guys all think they ethically right in doing this, and thus do not have to work against their emotions. Here is a better question instead: how many people donate to charitable causes and such things while not consciously thinking about the well-being of society as whole but rather because they feel emotional sympathy for the causes?

Anyway I need to go sleep now, but we can continue this in a few hours.

[Megadude]

perhaps u should refresh the page and read what i edited.

[CP5670]

done...the principle must apply to everything though, including more "serious" ethical issues, or you reach an inconsistency; one must stop following all ethics like that and not just the "harmless" ones.

[Megadude]

maybe i'm not so well informed or its getting late, but name some ethical issues

[CP5670]

hmm lets see...refraining from murdering everyone in sight, not because it is against the law and will be punishable, but instead because life is "precious" (note that this only applies to certain kinds of life ) and thus it is the "right" thing to do. If you ask most people whether or not they will kill someone if they would not get punished for it, they would almost certainly refuse; heck, even I would probably say the same thing, since I am controlled by these morals just as much as any of you are. (at least I can still think hypothetically with rationality though)

anyway I'm getting tired (been up since 6AM yesterday), so see you in a few hours.

[Mr. Vega]

Now selfishness is something that is without a doubt self-destructive. Selfishness reaches a point where it becomes irrational, so you don't need ethic to really get rid of that.

Still morals are still needed, it is much easier to enforce a moral than a law.

Must sleep......

[CP5670]

Now selfishness is something that is without a doubt self-destructive. Selfishness reaches a point where it becomes irrational, so you don't need ethic to really get rid of that.

That depends on your objectives; I can certainly see unlimited selfishness being a great virtue based on other conditions.

Still morals are still needed, it is much easier to enforce a moral than a law.

not necessarily; actually, law and law enforcement is more reliable, since the morals deal with the brain on an emotional level and there is thus always a significant element of uncertainty in how severely a person's action will be controlled by the morals.

[Megadude]

selfishness is indeed a very important attribute of humans (as well as any other life0.  Without it we wouldn't care about anything.  The will to live is selfish.  There are many levels of selfishness.

1. unselfish only with yourself, everyone else is game
2. unselfish with your family
3. unselfish with your friends
The following levels are not in order
a. unselfish with community
b. unselfish with class of people
c. unselfish with race of people

there are others...

[Mr. Vega]

1. No, I mean, selfishness leads to greed. You end up blinding your self unaware of the consequnces of your action(not morally, I mean Enron style)

2. Since it is emotional it carries with it uncertainty AND a greater motive for those who do not see the reasoning behind the laws(which is very common).

Please stop refuting my arguements. I have to sleep sometime.

[Mr. Vega]

You are all assuming that every person who performed a selfish act thought it out and planned it. There are never perfect situations. NO. Selfishness all to often, does not ccome with rationality.

Looks like I actually get to sleep tonight.

[Megadude]

selfishness is greed

[Megadude]

selfishness might not be planned and premeditated, but it is thought about.  In a split second the pros and cons are weighed out.