Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

Morality in a Hypothetical World

Chaosism
Posts: 2,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2016 8:58:24 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
Hypothetical World Background (Abstract)
Consider a world which is identical to ours, except:

- Due to core human genetics, 2% of humans (even distribution between male and female) are born with a incurable, vivid purple complexion. Coupled with this purple complexion is a genetic deficiency which causes offspring to be riddled with genetic deficiencies that are always ultimately fatal. Further, procreation with a purple human will result in the affliction of a fatal disease of a non-purple human. This genetic deficiency is so rooted into core human genetics that it cannot be removed or selected against by evolutionary mechanisms.

- As a result of evolution, all humans (even purple ones) completely lack the ability to empathize with purple humans. Further, due to the dangers posed by association with purple humans, all humans have adapted by developing a significant aversion to purple humans, much as one typically does for an insignificant creature that is poses some form of minor danger or nuisance. Note that this lack of empathy even trumps the natural bond between parents and children.

- There exist rare anomalies (<1%) in which an individual doesn't have an empathetic inhibition towards purple humans.

To briefly expand on empathy, an individual's sense of empathy is applicable to a limited array of subjects, which is based on perception. This "coverage" is not limited to any objective criteria, such a living beings. Typically, subjects that appeal the greatest to empathy are those "cute" and "defenseless" organisms, which often extends even to inanimate objects (e.g. teddy bears), as well. Alternatively, some forms of life are inherently repulsive and are generally excluded from an individual's empathy, such as mosquitos. Although not all people are willing to thoughtlessly squash mosquitos, humans are still much less inclined to be as remotely concerned about their lives as other creatures. And finally, there are individuals who outright lack the capacity for empathy for animals or just lack it, in general.

So, the question posed is:

What kind of societies, beliefs, traditions, and ethics do you imagine would be different in this hypothetical world assuming that the moral/ethical philosophy you hold is true?
David_Debates
Posts: 248
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2016 7:43:44 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/16/2016 8:58:24 PM, Chaosism wrote:
Hypothetical World Background (Abstract)
Consider a world which is identical to ours, except:

- Due to core human genetics, 2% of humans (even distribution between male and female) are born with a incurable, vivid purple complexion. Coupled with this purple complexion is a genetic deficiency which causes offspring to be riddled with genetic deficiencies that are always ultimately fatal. Further, procreation with a purple human will result in the affliction of a fatal disease of a non-purple human. This genetic deficiency is so rooted into core human genetics that it cannot be removed or selected against by evolutionary mechanisms.

- As a result of evolution, all humans (even purple ones) completely lack the ability to empathize with purple humans. Further, due to the dangers posed by association with purple humans, all humans have adapted by developing a significant aversion to purple humans, much as one typically does for an insignificant creature that is poses some form of minor danger or nuisance. Note that this lack of empathy even trumps the natural bond between parents and children.

- There exist rare anomalies (<1%) in which an individual doesn't have an empathetic inhibition towards purple humans.

To briefly expand on empathy, an individual's sense of empathy is applicable to a limited array of subjects, which is based on perception. This "coverage" is not limited to any objective criteria, such a living beings. Typically, subjects that appeal the greatest to empathy are those "cute" and "defenseless" organisms, which often extends even to inanimate objects (e.g. teddy bears), as well. Alternatively, some forms of life are inherently repulsive and are generally excluded from an individual's empathy, such as mosquitos. Although not all people are willing to thoughtlessly squash mosquitos, humans are still much less inclined to be as remotely concerned about their lives as other creatures. And finally, there are individuals who outright lack the capacity for empathy for animals or just lack it, in general.

So, the question posed is:

What kind of societies, beliefs, traditions, and ethics do you imagine would be different in this hypothetical world assuming that the moral/ethical philosophy you hold is true?

Seeing that I am a Christian:
Probably the purple people would be treated like lepers are in the old and new testament. Jesus would receive harsh criticism for associating with a purple person, but he would defend it in the same way he does in the Bible, that they are the ones that need salvation the most. There would also probably be some miracles that would be performed by him that "heal" this genetic deficiency. Is that what you meant?
Chaosism
Posts: 2,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2016 2:00:35 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/18/2016 7:43:44 AM, David_Debates wrote:

Seeing that I am a Christian:
Probably the purple people would be treated like lepers are in the old and new testament. Jesus would receive harsh criticism for associating with a purple person, but he would defend it in the same way he does in the Bible, that they are the ones that need salvation the most. There would also probably be some miracles that would be performed by him that "heal" this genetic deficiency. Is that what you meant?

Thanks for answering. The question was more along the lines of how today's society would be. If the modern religion of Christianity incorporated such beliefs about purple people in it's doctrine, then how do you think the modern churches view purple people, today? Remember, now, that people are incapable of having empathy towards these purple people.
David_Debates
Posts: 248
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2016 7:58:25 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/18/2016 2:00:35 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 8/18/2016 7:43:44 AM, David_Debates wrote:

Seeing that I am a Christian:
Probably the purple people would be treated like lepers are in the old and new testament. Jesus would receive harsh criticism for associating with a purple person, but he would defend it in the same way he does in the Bible, that they are the ones that need salvation the most. There would also probably be some miracles that would be performed by him that "heal" this genetic deficiency. Is that what you meant?

Thanks for answering. The question was more along the lines of how today's society would be. If the modern religion of Christianity incorporated such beliefs about purple people in it's doctrine, then how do you think the modern churches view purple people, today? Remember, now, that people are incapable of having empathy towards these purple people.

Oh, alright then. Before my answer, are the people capable of learning to tolerate these purple people?
Chaosism
Posts: 2,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2016 9:18:43 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/18/2016 7:58:25 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/18/2016 2:00:35 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 8/18/2016 7:43:44 AM, David_Debates wrote:

Seeing that I am a Christian:
Probably the purple people would be treated like lepers are in the old and new testament. Jesus would receive harsh criticism for associating with a purple person, but he would defend it in the same way he does in the Bible, that they are the ones that need salvation the most. There would also probably be some miracles that would be performed by him that "heal" this genetic deficiency. Is that what you meant?

Thanks for answering. The question was more along the lines of how today's society would be. If the modern religion of Christianity incorporated such beliefs about purple people in it's doctrine, then how do you think the modern churches view purple people, today? Remember, now, that people are incapable of having empathy towards these purple people.

Oh, alright then. Before my answer, are the people capable of learning to tolerate these purple people?

Whatever you imagine is fine. Sociopaths can treat people nicely for the purposes of fitting into society rather than actually caring about other people, for instance. The only stipulation is that the humans' sense of empathy simply doesn't extend to the purple people (save some anomalies).
David_Debates
Posts: 248
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2016 9:21:20 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/18/2016 9:18:43 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 8/18/2016 7:58:25 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/18/2016 2:00:35 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 8/18/2016 7:43:44 AM, David_Debates wrote:

Seeing that I am a Christian:
Probably the purple people would be treated like lepers are in the old and new testament. Jesus would receive harsh criticism for associating with a purple person, but he would defend it in the same way he does in the Bible, that they are the ones that need salvation the most. There would also probably be some miracles that would be performed by him that "heal" this genetic deficiency. Is that what you meant?

Thanks for answering. The question was more along the lines of how today's society would be. If the modern religion of Christianity incorporated such beliefs about purple people in it's doctrine, then how do you think the modern churches view purple people, today? Remember, now, that people are incapable of having empathy towards these purple people.

Oh, alright then. Before my answer, are the people capable of learning to tolerate these purple people?

Whatever you imagine is fine. Sociopaths can treat people nicely for the purposes of fitting into society rather than actually caring about other people, for instance. The only stipulation is that the humans' sense of empathy simply doesn't extend to the purple people (save some anomalies).

Then Catholicism would probably address purple people as people, not a separate group. It would, of course, state that sexual intercourse would be dangerous/deadly, but it wouldn't cast them away from the church, in the same way that homosexual sex leads to dangerous/deadly outcomes. Is this what you meant?
matt8800
Posts: 2,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2016 10:23:05 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/16/2016 8:58:24 PM, Chaosism wrote:
Hypothetical World Background (Abstract)
Consider a world which is identical to ours, except:

- Due to core human genetics, 2% of humans (even distribution between male and female) are born with a incurable, vivid purple complexion. Coupled with this purple complexion is a genetic deficiency which causes offspring to be riddled with genetic deficiencies that are always ultimately fatal. Further, procreation with a purple human will result in the affliction of a fatal disease of a non-purple human. This genetic deficiency is so rooted into core human genetics that it cannot be removed or selected against by evolutionary mechanisms.

- As a result of evolution, all humans (even purple ones) completely lack the ability to empathize with purple humans. Further, due to the dangers posed by association with purple humans, all humans have adapted by developing a significant aversion to purple humans, much as one typically does for an insignificant creature that is poses some form of minor danger or nuisance. Note that this lack of empathy even trumps the natural bond between parents and children.

- There exist rare anomalies (<1%) in which an individual doesn't have an empathetic inhibition towards purple humans.

To briefly expand on empathy, an individual's sense of empathy is applicable to a limited array of subjects, which is based on perception. This "coverage" is not limited to any objective criteria, such a living beings. Typically, subjects that appeal the greatest to empathy are those "cute" and "defenseless" organisms, which often extends even to inanimate objects (e.g. teddy bears), as well. Alternatively, some forms of life are inherently repulsive and are generally excluded from an individual's empathy, such as mosquitos. Although not all people are willing to thoughtlessly squash mosquitos, humans are still much less inclined to be as remotely concerned about their lives as other creatures. And finally, there are individuals who outright lack the capacity for empathy for animals or just lack it, in general.

So, the question posed is:

What kind of societies, beliefs, traditions, and ethics do you imagine would be different in this hypothetical world assuming that the moral/ethical philosophy you hold is true?

I believe empathy is the foundation for morality. As you mentioned earlier, we do not hold any regard for organisms' well-being we feel no empathy towards (snakes, mosquitos, etc). Unless they benefited non-purple people in some way, they would be at risk of being exterminated.

It seems to me that this would be an extreme example of tribalism whereas empathy is reduced for members of other tribes.
Chaosism
Posts: 2,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2016 4:35:40 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/18/2016 10:23:05 PM, matt8800 wrote:
At 8/16/2016 8:58:24 PM, Chaosism wrote:
Hypothetical World Background (Abstract)
Consider a world which is identical to ours, except:

- Due to core human genetics, 2% of humans (even distribution between male and female) are born with a incurable, vivid purple complexion. Coupled with this purple complexion is a genetic deficiency which causes offspring to be riddled with genetic deficiencies that are always ultimately fatal. Further, procreation with a purple human will result in the affliction of a fatal disease of a non-purple human. This genetic deficiency is so rooted into core human genetics that it cannot be removed or selected against by evolutionary mechanisms.

- As a result of evolution, all humans (even purple ones) completely lack the ability to empathize with purple humans. Further, due to the dangers posed by association with purple humans, all humans have adapted by developing a significant aversion to purple humans, much as one typically does for an insignificant creature that is poses some form of minor danger or nuisance. Note that this lack of empathy even trumps the natural bond between parents and children.

- There exist rare anomalies (<1%) in which an individual doesn't have an empathetic inhibition towards purple humans.

To briefly expand on empathy, an individual's sense of empathy is applicable to a limited array of subjects, which is based on perception. This "coverage" is not limited to any objective criteria, such a living beings. Typically, subjects that appeal the greatest to empathy are those "cute" and "defenseless" organisms, which often extends even to inanimate objects (e.g. teddy bears), as well. Alternatively, some forms of life are inherently repulsive and are generally excluded from an individual's empathy, such as mosquitos. Although not all people are willing to thoughtlessly squash mosquitos, humans are still much less inclined to be as remotely concerned about their lives as other creatures. And finally, there are individuals who outright lack the capacity for empathy for animals or just lack it, in general.

So, the question posed is:

What kind of societies, beliefs, traditions, and ethics do you imagine would be different in this hypothetical world assuming that the moral/ethical philosophy you hold is true?

I believe empathy is the foundation for morality. As you mentioned earlier, we do not hold any regard for organisms' well-being we feel no empathy towards (snakes, mosquitos, etc). Unless they benefited non-purple people in some way, they would be at risk of being exterminated.

As described in the scenario, their elimination would not be possible. However, do you think that they'd just be disposed of at birth, then? What if they could be useful for, say, labor?

It seems to me that this would be an extreme example of tribalism whereas empathy is reduced for members of other tribes.

Yes - very extreme and specific, though.
Chaosism
Posts: 2,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2016 4:36:13 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/18/2016 9:21:20 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/18/2016 9:18:43 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 8/18/2016 7:58:25 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/18/2016 2:00:35 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 8/18/2016 7:43:44 AM, David_Debates wrote:

Seeing that I am a Christian:
Probably the purple people would be treated like lepers are in the old and new testament. Jesus would receive harsh criticism for associating with a purple person, but he would defend it in the same way he does in the Bible, that they are the ones that need salvation the most. There would also probably be some miracles that would be performed by him that "heal" this genetic deficiency. Is that what you meant?

Thanks for answering. The question was more along the lines of how today's society would be. If the modern religion of Christianity incorporated such beliefs about purple people in it's doctrine, then how do you think the modern churches view purple people, today? Remember, now, that people are incapable of having empathy towards these purple people.

Oh, alright then. Before my answer, are the people capable of learning to tolerate these purple people?

Whatever you imagine is fine. Sociopaths can treat people nicely for the purposes of fitting into society rather than actually caring about other people, for instance. The only stipulation is that the humans' sense of empathy simply doesn't extend to the purple people (save some anomalies).

Then Catholicism would probably address purple people as people, not a separate group. It would, of course, state that sexual intercourse would be dangerous/deadly, but it wouldn't cast them away from the church, in the same way that homosexual sex leads to dangerous/deadly outcomes. Is this what you meant?

OK, but what about in regard to the world, at large?
matt8800
Posts: 2,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2016 6:38:34 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/19/2016 4:35:40 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 8/18/2016 10:23:05 PM, matt8800 wrote:
At 8/16/2016 8:58:24 PM, Chaosism wrote:
Hypothetical World Background (Abstract)
Consider a world which is identical to ours, except:

- Due to core human genetics, 2% of humans (even distribution between male and female) are born with a incurable, vivid purple complexion. Coupled with this purple complexion is a genetic deficiency which causes offspring to be riddled with genetic deficiencies that are always ultimately fatal. Further, procreation with a purple human will result in the affliction of a fatal disease of a non-purple human. This genetic deficiency is so rooted into core human genetics that it cannot be removed or selected against by evolutionary mechanisms.

- As a result of evolution, all humans (even purple ones) completely lack the ability to empathize with purple humans. Further, due to the dangers posed by association with purple humans, all humans have adapted by developing a significant aversion to purple humans, much as one typically does for an insignificant creature that is poses some form of minor danger or nuisance. Note that this lack of empathy even trumps the natural bond between parents and children.

- There exist rare anomalies (<1%) in which an individual doesn't have an empathetic inhibition towards purple humans.

To briefly expand on empathy, an individual's sense of empathy is applicable to a limited array of subjects, which is based on perception. This "coverage" is not limited to any objective criteria, such a living beings. Typically, subjects that appeal the greatest to empathy are those "cute" and "defenseless" organisms, which often extends even to inanimate objects (e.g. teddy bears), as well. Alternatively, some forms of life are inherently repulsive and are generally excluded from an individual's empathy, such as mosquitos. Although not all people are willing to thoughtlessly squash mosquitos, humans are still much less inclined to be as remotely concerned about their lives as other creatures. And finally, there are individuals who outright lack the capacity for empathy for animals or just lack it, in general.

So, the question posed is:

What kind of societies, beliefs, traditions, and ethics do you imagine would be different in this hypothetical world assuming that the moral/ethical philosophy you hold is true?

I believe empathy is the foundation for morality. As you mentioned earlier, we do not hold any regard for organisms' well-being we feel no empathy towards (snakes, mosquitos, etc). Unless they benefited non-purple people in some way, they would be at risk of being exterminated.

As described in the scenario, their elimination would not be possible. However, do you think that they'd just be disposed of at birth, then? What if they could be useful for, say, labor?

I would say whichever option provided the most benefit. We put beasts of burden to work but we dispose of them if they are a net detriment.

People might protest at my opinion but they should be reminded that they already treat animals in accordance to their empathy towards that animal. In your scenario, you specifically said empathy was pretty much non-existent.
David_Debates
Posts: 248
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2016 10:04:55 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/19/2016 4:36:13 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 8/18/2016 9:21:20 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/18/2016 9:18:43 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 8/18/2016 7:58:25 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/18/2016 2:00:35 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 8/18/2016 7:43:44 AM, David_Debates wrote:

Seeing that I am a Christian:
Probably the purple people would be treated like lepers are in the old and new testament. Jesus would receive harsh criticism for associating with a purple person, but he would defend it in the same way he does in the Bible, that they are the ones that need salvation the most. There would also probably be some miracles that would be performed by him that "heal" this genetic deficiency. Is that what you meant?

Thanks for answering. The question was more along the lines of how today's society would be. If the modern religion of Christianity incorporated such beliefs about purple people in it's doctrine, then how do you think the modern churches view purple people, today? Remember, now, that people are incapable of having empathy towards these purple people.

Oh, alright then. Before my answer, are the people capable of learning to tolerate these purple people?

Whatever you imagine is fine. Sociopaths can treat people nicely for the purposes of fitting into society rather than actually caring about other people, for instance. The only stipulation is that the humans' sense of empathy simply doesn't extend to the purple people (save some anomalies).

Then Catholicism would probably address purple people as people, not a separate group. It would, of course, state that sexual intercourse would be dangerous/deadly, but it wouldn't cast them away from the church, in the same way that homosexual sex leads to dangerous/deadly outcomes. Is this what you meant?

OK, but what about in regard to the world, at large?

Generally treated like lepers, as stated before. You know that they are people, but you abhor the sight of them.

That's really sad to think about, though.