Ethics - What are yours like? (Religious, member, show, quote)

streetwaves · 03-01-2009, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardboard adolescent

to be ethical is to be selfless, but to need ethics is to be selfish, therefore ethics are unethical.

The tendency to establish a system of ethics is inherent in mankind, and therefore (governed not so much by a person's mind but by their instincts) cannot be considered selfish, unless you blame the species for wanting to look after itself.

cardboard adolescent · 03-01-2009, 05:22 PM

i'm sorry, what is this mankind you're referring to, and how have you discerned its inherent tendencies?

i can't blame the species for wanting to look after itself, because i do not recognize the stable identity of the entity "the species" and as such i don't see how it could look after itself (to make this clear, a 'species' is an abstract concept derived from a familiarity with various individuals, and as such anything said about the species is simply a generalization of observations in particular instances. to say then that the species looks after itself is at best to say that in general individuals tend to look after themselves, and at worst a reference to an entity that simply doesn't exist in the way you're assuming)

as an individual, i notice personal tendencies toward both self-preservation and self-destruction, and i also notice that any system describing how to interact with other people is inevitably self-centered, since its primary content is the relation between the self and the other. to say that the system is other-centered amounts to pretty much the same thing, since we can only think about the other in relation to the self.

streetwaves · 03-01-2009, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardboard adolescent

i'm sorry, what is this mankind you're referring to, and how have you discerned its inherent tendencies?

i can't blame the species for wanting to look after itself, because i do not recognize the stable identity of the entity "the species" and as i don't see how it could look after itself

as an individual, i notice personal tendencies toward both self-preservation and self-destruction, and i also notice that any system describing how to interact with other people is inevitably self-centered, since its primary content is the relation between the self and the other. to say that the system is other-centered amounts to pretty much the same thing, since we can only think about the other in relation to the self.

I am obviously referring to the species of Homo sapiens. Do explain how saying that you do not recognize the stable identity of the entity of "the species" is not an obviously absurd position to take.

As an individual you may notice certain things as you've described, but a system that preserves its constituents itself is not barred from appearing selfish at an individual level. There is a natural desire in human beings to establish or advocate a system of ethics, and it is not in the least bit selfish to do so - it's beyond our control. Without such a mechanism inherent in human beings, the species would not survive. It's an explanation of how we have survived.

cardboard adolescent · 03-01-2009, 07:00 PM

it's beyond your control to act ethically?

streetwaves · 03-01-2009, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardboard adolescent

it's beyond your control to act ethically?

I never said anything of the sort. It's simply a natural part of me to want to implement a system of ethics based on an inherent sense of right and wrong. That doesn't mean I'm incapable of wrong, but I'm aware of what it is and the system helps to discourage it.

ixtlan22 · 03-01-2009, 07:29 PM

Why implement a system when you have an inherent sense of right and wrong?

streetwaves · 03-01-2009, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ixtlan22

Why implement a system when you have an inherent sense of right and wrong?

I've just explained it. There is no 'why', other than because it's in our nature. It just so happens to be useful in promoting good and discouraging evil, because just having a sense of right and wrong does not mean all is going to be perfect.

cardboard adolescent · 03-01-2009, 08:03 PM

i'm not sure what you're talking about when you say ethics, it's a system that encourages certain types of behavior? i thought ethics was a system which defines right and wrong, but you're saying right and wrong are innate so ethics is just a system of behavior that makes it easy to be right and avoid wrong? that would mean that ethical dilemmas would only present themselves as issues over the best 'way' to avoid wrong rather than whether something is wrong or not, since everyone would have an innate sense of this. but since people argue all the time over what is right and what is wrong (see abortion, animal rights, slavery) ethics probably goes a bit deeper than that.

streetwaves · 03-01-2009, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardboard adolescent

i'm not sure what you're talking about when you say ethics, it's a system that encourages certain types of behavior? i thought ethics was a system which defines right and wrong, but you're saying right and wrong are innate so ethics is just a system of behavior that makes it easy to be right and avoid wrong? that would mean that ethical dilemmas would only present themselves as issues over the best 'way' to avoid wrong rather than whether something is wrong or not, since everyone would have an innate sense of this. but since people argue all the time over what is right and what is wrong (see abortion, animal rights, slavery) ethics probably goes a bit deeper than that.

The sense of right and wrong are innate. We don't need ethics to know the difference between the two, and I've never said or thought that. Ethics are a collective definition of right and wrong. You could say the 'reason' behind ethics is that it helps to encourage good behavior and provide validation for it, and discourage bad behavior. Ethical dilemmas would, indeed,only be issues as to how good should be done. People argue all the time over what's right or wrong, but as I explained in the "Morality and the Bible" thread, that has a lot to do with corruption of morality via religion or other cultural factors. This is another thing that ethics can help with: attempting to create a moral common ground between various groups.

Inuzuka Skysword · 03-01-2009, 08:57 PM

While I may be going back in the thread a bit, which I did not read all of, how are ethics selfless? Ayn Rand would say the exact opposite.

03-01-2009, 07:29 PM	#36 (permalink)
ixtlan22 Loves Jan Terri Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 184	Why implement a system when you have an inherent sense of right and wrong? __________________ "Peculiar travel suggestions are dancing lessons from God." -Bockonon-

03-01-2009, 05:22 PM	#32 (permalink)
cardboard adolescent ;) Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: CA Posts: 3,503	i'm sorry, what is this mankind you're referring to, and how have you discerned its inherent tendencies? i can't blame the species for wanting to look after itself, because i do not recognize the stable identity of the entity "the species" and as such i don't see how it could look after itself (to make this clear, a 'species' is an abstract concept derived from a familiarity with various individuals, and as such anything said about the species is simply a generalization of observations in particular instances. to say then that the species looks after itself is at best to say that in general individuals tend to look after themselves, and at worst a reference to an entity that simply doesn't exist in the way you're assuming) as an individual, i notice personal tendencies toward both self-preservation and self-destruction, and i also notice that any system describing how to interact with other people is inevitably self-centered, since its primary content is the relation between the self and the other. to say that the system is other-centered amounts to pretty much the same thing, since we can only think about the other in relation to the self.

03-01-2009, 07:00 PM	#34 (permalink)
cardboard adolescent ;) Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: CA Posts: 3,503	it's beyond your control to act ethically?

03-01-2009, 08:03 PM	#38 (permalink)
cardboard adolescent ;) Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: CA Posts: 3,503	i'm not sure what you're talking about when you say ethics, it's a system that encourages certain types of behavior? i thought ethics was a system which defines right and wrong, but you're saying right and wrong are innate so ethics is just a system of behavior that makes it easy to be right and avoid wrong? that would mean that ethical dilemmas would only present themselves as issues over the best 'way' to avoid wrong rather than whether something is wrong or not, since everyone would have an innate sense of this. but since people argue all the time over what is right and what is wrong (see abortion, animal rights, slavery) ethics probably goes a bit deeper than that.

03-01-2009, 08:57 PM	#40 (permalink)
Inuzuka Skysword Existential Egoist Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 1,468	While I may be going back in the thread a bit, which I did not read all of, how are ethics selfless? Ayn Rand would say the exact opposite.