Talk-Polywell.org

Like it or not ambiguity is a seemingly unavoidable facet of our experience of reality - it's inherent to science (the measurement problem, wave-particle duality), maths (Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem) and philosophy (the full works). Those who think that they can use science to build an indubitabl...

KitemanSA wrote:it is that simple, really

In your opinion.

And that's all it is, an opinion, the truth of which you cannot prove.

Congratulations Kite on solving one of the oldest problems of philosophy - a problem that great minds have pondered over for at least two and half thousand years!

Who'd a thunk it'd be so simple?

KitemanSA wrote: Approach morality as a scientist might. Look thru all the various attempts thru the ages to describe what people call "right" as opposed to "good".

This is an objective method. But you can't demonstrate that it is a method that will give you access to some kind of objective moral truth.

-

What is our statement of MORALITY? (right vs. wrong)? What makes something "right" as distinct from "good"? This is your distinction. Ethics is moral philosophy. It involves discussions about how we ought to act, what is right and wrong behaviour, as well as the nature of the good and the good life.

Note : The "basic assumptions" I listed were meant as examples - they are most certainly not the assumptions upon which I base my own moral beliefs.

-

And fwiw, my morality is based upon the unprovable utilitarian assumption that that which minimises harm and suffering or increases happiness and well being is the good.

Morality (right vs wrong) is in fact a binary set. There is no "righter or rightest. Actions are either right or wrong. Sorry, this is an unprovable assertion. Morality is a value judgement. What one person thinks is morally acceptable, another may find unacceptable - and there is no objective way,...

Hubris seems to be a characteristic of people who think they are too smart to miss something. Projection bias: " a psychological defense mechanism where a person subconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, usually to other p...

The Naturalistic Fallacy

krenshala wrote: his lack of any cite or numbers ... lead to my mistake.

A few posts back:

CKay wrote:2011 annual homicide rate per 100,000

UK 1.3
US 4.8

hanelyp wrote:Is that poverty leading to crime, or criminal mentality leading to poverty?

I'm sure that nobody here is suggesting that members of one racial group are genetically more predisposed towards a "criminal mentality" than any other... are they?

you obviously think it is more "civilized" for a man to watch an intruder break into your house rape your wife or daughter in front of you while you are a good witness for the police, than the barbaric american who would rather shoot the SOB Obviously . :wink: Such ridiculously overblown and easily...

krenshala wrote:Um, the murder rate in the US is only ... only ... four times higher than in the UK? Thats not too shabby considering we have about five times the population.

Haha.... priceless!

Please keep the comedy coming everyone.

You cannot make these binary distinctions without ending up with ludicrous results one way or another. Oh, I quite agree - not that such a reasoned argument is likely to persuade Diogenes. But then his hyperbolic, logically fallacious, scatter-gun arguments aren't likely to change minds either (as ...