[CP5670]

Exactly, and in fact, this is also why our so-called "rights" exist: to keep us quiet. Not because we "inherently deserve them" or any such nonsense.

more advanced gun

Fear my broken bottles!!

[Snakeseyes]

Originally posted by Bobboau
it is not in our best interest to exploit people becase after an amount of time the people we exploit will rise up and kill us

further it is in our best interest to try and help people becase some day we may be in need and could use the fact that we helped them as leverage to get help ourselves, it would then be in there best interest to help us as they may be in need again some day and if they don't help us when we are in need then we will be less likely to help them when they need it.

Bobboau, wait, you are confusing me. You said that you care about the people, and now you are saying that it's just your best interest? That's your morals? I you want to help someone because you have some morals, some believes, you don't help him for just your best interest.

And this is for Bobboau, please BL and CP5670 don't start saying that what you do is only for you interests, I know it, you said it so many times.

[Blue Lion]

Originally posted by Snakeseyes
I know what you said. But wouldn't be in your best interest to have the Africans as your slaves???

All you said untill now is that your goverment should work only for the best of its people, you. What is better than many cheap, in fact free, working hands, with no rights, meaning no salary, no days off, no 8hour work. That would lead to a better economy, therefore a better quality of life for the citizens. And the slaves weren't considered exactly citizens, they were something like objects, or better, animals.

So, that answers your question???

Let me ask you a question

wouldn't be in your best interest to have the Africans as your slaves???

[/b]

And please, answer honestly.

[Bobboau]

there are a meriad of inherant behaviors, the logic of these behaviors may not be totaly understud by us but we follow our instincts as would any other animal,
amung these instints include a sence of justice, a sort of balence between "good" and "bad"
good being things that our instincts determine as something benifecal
bad would be the oposite
oftine our instincts conflict
for instance sex, we have a very strong urge to procreate, most oftine we do not think of the outcome however, there are thus a serese of counter instincts that try to hold you and you're mate together and this has led to a whole host of marage like arangments throughout the world, there are in fact very few cultures that do not hold manogonis (note: I do not mean exlusive) relationships as being extreemly important, this is one of the places love comes in to hold people together wich goes into the famely structure wich then goes into the larger cultural alignment (what ever you define yourself as, most people today ether culturaly define themselves primaraly by nation or religon)

all emotions and ethical sences serve a logical role in the survival of our specise,
ethics are compsed of both biological and cultural elements,
evolution plays on both the biological and cultural components of emotions and ethics,
changes in ethical systems can only ocur quickly on the cultural elements,
the biological elements will remain vurtualy unaltered

[Bobboau]

in responce to Snakeseyes
I was tring to explian the greater logic of morality

[CP5670]

all emotions and ethical sences serve a logical role in the survival of our specise,

Change "serve" to "at one point served." Other factors have changed since then.

good being things that our instincts determine as something benifecal

So basically what you are saying is that anything we do would be "good." Our instincts also dictate us to do many things considered detrimental even by the moralists. (i.e. all the "bad" traits of humans)

[Grey Wolf]

Originally posted by wEvil
Face it, democracy is the stillborn child of feudalism.

But.... But.... But.... I like Feudalism. 99% less morons gaining power through money....

[Bobboau]

when I say I care about people I am refering to the emotion most people are born with called empathy, to care about someone, to put you're self in there position and understand there suffering (or whatever the situation), empathy is aplied to anything that you feel is part of your cultural alignment, most people in the western world (such as myself) veiw all of humanity as part of there cultural alignment, some extend it to animals (PETA), some only go as far as what they would define as there race or nation, but anything you put into your cultural alignment is something you will care about and defend and will feel bad if you do something to them that you wouldn't want to be done to you.

the fact that I uderstand this and can explain it logicaly does not mean I am above it or am un effected by it

[CP5670]

That does not exactly explain it logically though, if the concept of individuality also exists. Why care about the "cultural alignment," or rather, why extend it beyond yourself?

But.... But.... But.... I like Feudalism. 99% less morons gaining power through money....

communism for life!

[Bobboau]

in responce to CP5670
we have a number of instincts, many of wich conflict,
"good" can be defined as something we would want to be done to us in such a situation (as we find some other person)
a "bad" instinct could be defined as one wich violates this (or any of the cultural rules I may be subject to)

[Bobboau]

in more recent responce to CP5670
becase that is the evolutionary survival stratigy our specise is useing, society
all of this is to alow us to get along with our fellow humans so we can live in a groupe wich (as can be deduced by our domination of the planet), has a marked benefit over living by our selves living selfish greedy lives like most other animals on the planet

[CP5670]

we have a number of instincts, many of wich conflict,
"good" can be defined as something we would want to be done to us in such a situation (as we find some other person)
a "bad" instinct could be defined as one wich violates this (or any of the cultural rules I may be subject to)

If they conflict, why do we still obey them unquestioningly? Going by instincts alone is silly as I said in the other thread, since any random action could be explained by that. Also, why is it that everyone has their own idea of instinctual "good" and "bad?" (e.g. al Qaeda) Together, the facts are somewhat suggestive towards to conclusion that the morals are a part of our surroundings (we are not born with them, but we pick them up fast), and this is what forms the majority of our intuitive behaviors.

becase that is the evolutionary survival stratigy our specise is useing, society
all of this is to alow us to get along with our fellow humans so we can live in a groupe wich (as can be deduced by our domination of the planet), has a marked benefit over living by our selves living selfish greedy lives like most other animals on the planet

But are our benefits at all related to the ethics? It is just as possible that the ethics were the old laws; a necessary component to start up human civilization, but no longer necessary. Also, this does not explain why they should be followed like a strict religion.

[Snakeseyes]

Originally posted by Blue Lion


Let me ask you a question



And please, answer honestly. [/B]

Never answer a question with a question.

Now that you started, I 'll answer you with another question. Do you believe that the american civil war was an act of your governement that was for the best interest of its people???

[Bobboau]

Also, why is it that everyone has their own idea of instinctual "good" and "bad?"

give a specific example and I will explain how, include how they have made the determineation that what they are doing is good

the fact that many of the ethical systems are so very similar to each other on the most basic level even going back into other primates, in addition to there benifital results, has led me to the conclusion that ethics are, at least in part, a biological trait


"Never answer a question with a question."
always answer a question with a question if you don't have a good answer, or you're stalling while you think, or you're trying to turn something around on someone

[CP5670]

I already gave one there: tell me how blowing up buildings with suicide bombers (losing both your guys and their guys) leads to the survival of the species. Morals cannot be a biological trait due to the lack of consistency I mentioned, and even if they are, that is no reason to automatically say that they are necessary to the objective. (as I said, all the "bad" human traits are also equally biological; we must derive them differently, and if they cannot be done so, then they must go)

[Snakeseyes]

Originally posted by CP5670


But are our benefits at all related to the ethics? It is just as possible that the ethics were the old laws; a necessary component to start up human civilization, but no longer necessary. Also, this does not explain why they should be followed like a strict religion.

Ethics, or  morals, or code of laws, aren't required for the start of a civilization. They are required for the keeping of life. Many animals species have their kind of morals, or laws. Lets say, a lion won't kill a newborn lion, but human has in all times excercized atrocities like this.

[CP5670]

Ethics, or morals, or code of laws, aren't required for the start of a civilization. They are required for the keeping of life. Many animals species have their kind of morals, or laws. Lets say, a lion won't kill a newborn lion, but human has in all times excercized atrocities like this.

We have been through all this already. A lion may not kill a newborn lion (actually even this is only restricted to his own cubs), but then why is it that a lion will kill anything else without hesitation? I wouldn't exactly call that ethical, but it helps him work towards his objective of survival. Same goes for humanity. (humanity, not humans) In fact, I am beginning to wonder if it may not be the morals themselves that will ultimately lead to the demise of forward progress in learning (particularly philosophy), since it is apparent from this thread that people are not easily able to think objectively on these issues. A disease it is indeed.

[Bobboau]

But are our benefits at all related to the ethics? It is just as possible that the ethics were the old laws; a necessary component to start up human civilization, but no longer necessary. Also, this does not explain why they should be followed like a strict religion.

"But are our benefits at all related to the ethics"
yes, if people hold you as part of there groupe, and care about you, and treat you ethicaly, it means you and you're childeren are more likely to survive

"It is just as possible that the ethics were the old laws; a necessary component to start up human civilization, but no longer necessary. "
if this is true, and you're vision is in fact better, than you're eutopian brog society will eventualy evolve and domonate our world

"Also, this does not explain why they should be followed like a strict religion"
you should follow your instincts there there for a reason, and defying them will only result in potentaly faulty genes being passed to the next generation

[CP5670]

yes, if people hold you as part of there groupe, and care about you, and treat you ethicaly, it means you and you're childeren are more likely to survive

That's not what I am saying; how is following the ethics like a super religion helping us in our objective of attaining knowledge?

if this is true, and you're vision is in fact better, than you're eutopian brog society will eventualy evolve and domonate our world

good, good.

you should follow your instincts there there for a reason, and defying them will only result in potentaly faulty genes being passed to the next generation

So now bin Laden is rationally justified in his objectives, eh? And what do your life's thoughts have to do with passing on genes? For example, the children of the great scientists of history were seldom at the same level as their parents.

Wait, all of this has been discussed before in that "explain the universe thread;" find something new.

[Bobboau]

Originally posted by CP5670
but then why is it that a lion will kill anything else without hesitation?

becase he is a preditor, he does not atack his own pride (with the exeption of any potental rivals, or the offspring of the previus domonant lion(s))
lions are a radicaly diferent animal, with a radicaly diferent socal environment, but were there are similaritys to humans society there are similar ethical rules in lion ethics
most of the similaritys lay in domonance and keeping favor though