|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Sept 5, 2010 20:07:35 GMT
What are "morals"?ASome universal moral and ethical standards emperically exist seperate of the views or perceptions of individuals or social constructs ie somethings are simply.. just wrong that's that. B"Right" and "wrong" are entirely subjective constructs differing from individual to individual and from society to society. All conceptions of ethics are valid or even equal. C"Right" and "wrong" are entirely subjective constructs differing from individual to individual and from society to society. Some conceptions of ethics are more equal than others. DOther- please specify. I'm going to write a War and Peace-esque tract on my views on this, but I'm a bit debated out from a FB status discussion on "Is Morrissey a racist?/"why Leeds is a shithole" that broke out as I started on this thread. So in the meantime.. interested to see how people will react to the question. Edit- also I'd prefer if this was more a calm "hey let's learn from each other!" discussion rather than a heated "OMG ARE YOU SAYING IT'S OK TO BE A RAPIST "? "HOW DARE YOU SAY I IMPLIED THAT?!" debate. But hey that's just my subjective conception of this thread
|
|
|
Post by helwin tins on Sept 5, 2010 20:18:26 GMT
ughhhhhhhhhhh. hey, look at this ad that keeps coming up for me!
|
|
|
Post by lastgoodbye on Sept 5, 2010 20:27:59 GMT
Interesting question. I agree that lots, perhaps even most, notions of wrong and right are subjective, and differ between societies and individuals, like you said. But I guess I'd have to click option A, because I believe that there are some things which are just WRONG, like murder, and sexual abuse, and torture, and some things are morally right, like perfect equality between all people, and like, that's it. In a perfect world there would be no compromise. But that is just my personal perception of a perfect world. I acknowledge that, but I still think it's right
|
|
|
Post by tarantella on Sept 5, 2010 20:45:52 GMT
I guess I lean most towards option c... although I wouldn't say "more equal," because that doesn't make sense to me. I'd say that anyone has the right to hold whatever ethical beliefs they want, though not necessarily the right to act on those beliefs, because their beliefs might suck (in the eyes of the law). It's like, everyone has the right to their opinion, but that doesn't mean I have to value or give a shit about the ones I don't like. Generally I do try to listen and understand opposing opinions, because I think it's important to not be a bigot, but yeah, I won't think an opinion is necessarily valid just because someone else espouses it.
|
|
|
Post by Rhiflect on Sept 6, 2010 16:11:41 GMT
I went A, because as much as cultures are (and should be) allowed to have different boundries, some things just should never be allowed to happen.
See also: Florence's post.
|
|
|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Sept 6, 2010 16:59:44 GMT
To explain why I voted B, focusing only on the sort of "just wrong" extremes brought up here.
I believe in advocating for protection from extremes like murder, rape etc and the care of victims though the broad social consensus among the overwhelming majority who share my (subjective) views about abuse of others via the legal system.. these things are sickening to me as acts but my personal ideal (which I often utterly fail at of course..) is not to make subjective judgments about others conduct even when it seems blatantly justified or even offensive NOT to judge. I guess I subscribe to the Christian ideal of concentrating on the "mote in your own eye" and "he who is without sin cast the first stone". I also buy something close to the Christian idea that humanity is innately flawed and that given the right combination of circumstances all of us have a potential killer, abuser inside us. So who I'm I to judge an unrepentant killer or rapist? I'm no better than they are in my own eyes. By expressing perfectly natural outrage, anger and desire for vengeance/punishment I'm just succumbing to the same aggressive energy that caused the "evil" act I'm reacting to in the first place and adding to the fractious, ugly noise of humanity.
Anger, hate and judgmental ism are the most natural and human things in the world, but imagine if more people aimed to detach themselves from those feelings? "a man who desires no more from things than to understand them, easily makes peace with his soul" - Nietzsche. I believe injustice, brutality and prejudice are hot wired not only into the DNA of humanity but into the DNA of nature itself (have you ever stopped to consider what an amazingly brutal and fucked up thing say.. the food chain, is?) as well as creativity, beauty and all the good shit. I don't think one side can exist without the other, without ugliness beauty has nothing to distinguish itself by and is thus meaningless. Therefore "evil" is essential, though people who try and combat it are grand, they're playing an essential part in the order of things and should leave the naval-gazing observation to the likes of me and keep being wonderful.
I think to do something so contrary to our natural instinct as to show love/compassion for someone who's fallen into the role of a murderer, rapist or genocidal dictator is a real mind blower, a revolutionary idea. I remember reading a story about a black Christian lady who's son had been brutally killed in an unprovoked racist attack... she expressed compassion and forgiveness for her sons killers. That's so beautiful, humanity overcoming itself and functioning at the height of its potential. A lot of you will think my views are woolly, naive, or pretentious but I think if there's such a thing as role models than that lady would be the ideal for me.
|
|
|
Post by sarah on Sept 11, 2010 12:11:08 GMT
i'm right and you're wrong and there's nothing you can do about it
|
|
|
Post by helwin tins on Sept 11, 2010 15:21:27 GMT
I remember reading a story about a black Christian lady who's son had been brutally killed in an unprovoked racist attack... she expressed compassion and forgiveness for her sons killers. That's so beautiful, humanity overcoming itself and functioning at the height of its potential. A lot of you will think my views are woolly, naive, or pretentious but I think if there's such a thing as role models than that lady would be the ideal for me. Except for that there's no way that works functionally within society. On a basic level, we shun and abhor violent acts because they're to the detriment of the human race. Judging people who commit crimes against the social code functions as 1. a deterrent and 2. a means to determine who is not safe to be around, and should therefore be rejected.
|
|
|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Sept 11, 2010 19:02:22 GMT
That's why that particular "social code" is bullshit - you make a good point about the evolutionary function it serves, but I try and strive for the notion "man is something that should be overcome"; if we just followed oour learned evolutionary urges men would still be whacking each other with clubs, while women attempt to mate with the man most skilled at clubbing his rivals (wait! that still actually happens in a lot of society...). I think if a remedy exists it would be moving forward, challenging social codes even those that seem fundamental common sense in order to come up with new routes to what I'd perceive to be a more enlightened and peaceful society. It seems obvious to me that vengefulness and violence begets more violence and striving toward the superhuman feat of "loving your enemy" would make the world a better place.
But it really doesn't matter what I think or what any of you think of what I think. I was wasting my time typing that long rant and I'm wasting my time now, you lot all have your own belief system and view of the world as inbuilt and steadfast as mine, I'd probably be best served keeping mine to myself. Typing my thoughts out to be recorded and read by others seems to validate them somehow to me, but it really does nothing of the sort. I just don't really care. Hell, despite my attempts to show reverence toward compassion I feel little or no kindship or common ground with my fellow man at all. The very reason I feel idealistically driven to "rise above" or detach myself from human nature and society is coming from a base of pure nihilism or pessimism at least. I speak from the point of someone who think the very core of humanity and nature is rotten and all we can really hope for is to survive and impede others ease of survival as little as possible. Add as little as possible to the noise and discomfort of the world.
|
|
|
Post by tarantella on Sept 12, 2010 19:05:13 GMT
It wasn't a waste, Josh. I enjoyed reading it.
|
|
|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Sept 12, 2010 20:55:16 GMT
Oh don't worry Tara I wasn't feeling sorry for myself I've just been trying to aim for a sort of zen-like abstinence from having opinions and shouting my mouth... to sit back observe and learn more and speak less. Also thinking it's a futile expression of energy into the world. However as you'll see from the American Politics thread THAT didn't last too long.
|
|
|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Sept 12, 2010 22:10:19 GMT
not being funny, but JOSH, you've made this thread a MILLION TIMES. The consequential sense of perpetual deja vu is making me queasy, just like your cassie sigs. What do you honestly really expect me to say to that?
|
|
|
Post by helwin tins on Sept 12, 2010 23:37:49 GMT
"i'll stop repeating myself over and over and provoking people into having discussion that don't have a point beyond me having the opportunity to state my views" maybe?
every time you make a thread josh, i can't fight the feeling that you're only making it so that you can tell people what you think about the topic.
|
|
|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Sept 13, 2010 1:15:54 GMT
Yawn.
Is it annual "lets all give Josh shit" day again already? That sounds really childish and egotistical, but if you look back at the posting history of this forum for whatever reason everyone getting suddenly pissed off and backlashing at me seems to have happened quite a few times now, though my method of posting is pretty consistent. I'd rather this wasn't the case and I'd rather people weren't annoyed by my posts. However if they bother you its your responsibility to not read them, unless you LIKE being annoyed, bickering and complaining about things in which case feel free to continue. Don't expect any luck though as I have neither the will nor ability to present myself differently. As I am never malicious and seldom rude these days, I see no reason bar popularity for me to not just type what I think in a way that comes naturally like everyone else. If you think I'm egotistical and me me me with my posts then don't do me the favour of switching them around from the topic at hand to being ABOUT me.
I've said myself I'm wasting my time posting my thoughts online, it's not a good use of time and energy so in a way I suppose I agree with Annabel and Sibz. Though if I make the decision to reduce or refrain from contributing to the forum it will be of my own accord and for my own benefit. It is quite struggle enough to marshall my own thoughts and feelings without trying to cater my responses to those of others (that I don't fully understand in this case) beyond aiming to post with the same respect and tolerance for the rest of you and your views as I'd like to be shown myself (of course I wasn't always like that....). The implication of calculated provocation behind my posts is just wrong, every thing I post is just my honest reaction to things and in fairness those can be quite contrary in a way a lot of people would just keep inside to avoid rocking the boat, though if I'm not personally attacking anyone in what I say I don't get why it's a problem.
|
|
|
Post by helwin tins on Sept 13, 2010 1:36:51 GMT
actually, it's just "josh asks a question and doesn't like the answer day". i don't care what you post, go wild, it's the internet, all-day-long party woooo.
|
|
|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Sept 13, 2010 1:45:16 GMT
My reply to Annabel was rhetorical.
|
|
|
Post by helwin tins on Sept 13, 2010 9:57:19 GMT
there's no such thing as a rhetorical question on the internet.
|
|
|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Sept 14, 2010 0:10:46 GMT
oh, fuck this
If you don't like my posts don't read them, but if you don't choose to take that advice and post "sharp" digs/banter (whatever you want to call it) I don't get the point of I'll ignore them too. Sorted.
I choose to reply there because since Sibz backed up your criticism I thought it was something about my conduct here that should be addressed, but it's clear enough that there isn't an interest in trying to see it from my point of view so just another recent example of me wasting my time.
|
|
|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Sept 14, 2010 15:55:22 GMT
Well since you admited you were trolling (ie posting for no other reason other than to get at another poster/cause conflict) I'd actually be within the forum roles to delete any such posts from you. HA! Check mate.
Oh wait.... that totally goes against everything I believe in or have ever said on the topic of moderation on this forum ) : shit, bloody principals. Who'd have'um?
Therefore the official verdict from the judges.... ANNABEL WYNNES ) :
I'm not going to delete my account but I'm going to delete the forum from my favourites for a while and have one of my "breaks". I'll be back of course, it's just my bleak state of mind is bleeding into my posts too much, I do the devil's advocate/alternate view posting to add the quality/interestingness of discussion for everyone but I don't think it's adding anything positive to the community at this point nor do I feel I'm, getting anything from being here but more stress lately.
Obviously in this crazy space age social networking world there's a thousand otherways to contact me if anyone wishes to do so. I think I'll probably be back in time to comment on the Doctor Who Christmas Special at least. Not upset, not paddying, just letting go of the towel.
|
|
|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Sept 14, 2010 15:56:43 GMT
oh and I might just be on chatzy...
|
|