Total Posts:16|Showing Posts:1-16
Jump to topic:

Goal Based Ethics

mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2009 2:53:13 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
For those of you who think Ethics is, or ought to be, derived from goals (Puck, Ragnar, whoever else)

I ask: How is it these goals come to be?

I think this question needs to be answered if "goals" is to be seen as having any explanatory value at all.

Plus I have suggested a source: natural human caring + social circumstance; which has been denied both Puck and Ragnar, but neither have sketched out any ideas of some other source.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2009 2:57:25 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/9/2009 2:53:13 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

suggested a source: natural human caring + social *developtment
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2009 4:55:07 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I ask: How is it these goals come to be?
By means of free will.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2009 4:59:38 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/9/2009 4:55:07 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
I ask: How is it these goals come to be?
By means of free will.

So you decide. Why do you do so.

& What is the standard on which these decisions are based off of?
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2009 5:03:18 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/9/2009 4:59:38 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 12/9/2009 4:55:07 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
I ask: How is it these goals come to be?
By means of free will.

So you decide. Why do you do so.
So gravity means you fall?
Why?
Because it's an attractive force.
Why?
Maybe I can rephrase it for a while but some things are irreducible.


& What is the standard on which these decisions are based off of?
Meaningless. Standards derive from that decision-- not the other way around.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2009 5:11:33 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Some things are irreducable; like as you pointed out, the nature of reality; but given the physical world our natures aren't until you get to the very small scale.

I got Puck down to values. Do you think you could give me that? That you choose those things which you value?
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2009 5:14:48 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
"goal" and "ultimate value" are synonyms. Other values are derived from and judged by their relation to that set of synonyms.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2009 5:18:25 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/9/2009 5:14:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
"goal" and "ultimate value" are synonyms. Other values are derived from and judged by their relation to that set of synonyms.

So these ultimate values are chosen, but you can't describe how they're chosen,

would you accept that the physical world is a reasonable assumption, given the lack of a better fitting explanation for experience.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2009 5:33:13 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/9/2009 5:11:33 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

I got Puck down to values. Do you think you could give me that? That you choose those things which you value?

I think I may have been mistaken, after re-checking I think he may have been saying something like what you said.

Puck: "What an individual cares about is an evaluation of, to put it redundantly, value."
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2009 5:38:43 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Either way, your theory of Ethics stops at a certain arbitrary point, and mine includes yours but goes beyond it.

You may dismiss mine, but mine actually ties Ethics to the natural/physical world (through Evolution), and has greater explanatory potential (unless you dismiss the existence of cares all together). Further it better fits the evidence of similar "goals"/Ultimate values amongst peoples in that decisions/evaluations are not arbitrary but are based upon human nature.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2009 5:44:31 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/9/2009 5:18:25 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 12/9/2009 5:14:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
"goal" and "ultimate value" are synonyms. Other values are derived from and judged by their relation to that set of synonyms.

So these ultimate values are chosen, but you can't describe how they're chosen,
If I could describe effectively, I would have thereby proven determinism.


would you accept that the physical world is a reasonable assumption
A reasonable assumption for...?

You may dismiss mine, but mine actually ties Ethics to the natural/physical world (through Evolution)
By this you contradict:

mine includes yours
Either something is determined by nature or it's subject to free will, you can't have it both ways.

Further it better fits the evidence of similar "goals"/Ultimate values amongst peoples
There is no such evidence. There are loads of people with goals significantly different from mine. Fig. 1. Suicides.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2009 5:59:54 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/9/2009 5:44:31 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 12/9/2009 5:18:25 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 12/9/2009 5:14:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
"goal" and "ultimate value" are synonyms. Other values are derived from and judged by their relation to that set of synonyms.

So these ultimate values are chosen, but you can't describe how they're chosen,
If I could describe effectively, I would have thereby proven determinism.


would you accept that the physical world is a reasonable assumption
A reasonable assumption for...?

Objective reality, that is until you have reason to believe otherwise.

You may dismiss mine, but mine actually ties Ethics to the natural/physical world (through Evolution)
By this you contradict: "mine includes yours"

Either something is determined by nature or it's subject to free will, you can't have it both ways.

Given Phys. reality, I would explain choice as an illusion due to the limited ability, of our evolved state of consciousness, to percieve objective reality.

Our Idea of choice is, in objective reality, a representation of physical happenings in a way that is possible for our evolved consciousness to comprehend.

Further it better fits the evidence of similar "goals"/Ultimate values amongst peoples
There is no such evidence. There are loads of people with goals significantly different from mine. Fig. 1. Suicides.

Yep, there are. But there are lots of people with the goal of life, and there are patterns of suicide in different areas depending on the environmental happenings.
Plus goals like attaining money, a family, freinds, power, are predictably popular.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2009 8:54:35 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/9/2009 5:59:54 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 12/9/2009 5:44:31 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 12/9/2009 5:18:25 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 12/9/2009 5:14:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
"goal" and "ultimate value" are synonyms. Other values are derived from and judged by their relation to that set of synonyms.

So these ultimate values are chosen, but you can't describe how they're chosen,
If I could describe effectively, I would have thereby proven determinism.


would you accept that the physical world is a reasonable assumption
A reasonable assumption for...?

Objective reality
The physical world is part of objective reality. Is a finger a reasonable assumption for a hand? I don't get where you're going.


You may dismiss mine, but mine actually ties Ethics to the natural/physical world (through Evolution)
By this you contradict: "mine includes yours"

Either something is determined by nature or it's subject to free will, you can't have it both ways.

Given Phys. reality, I would explain choice as an illusion
Taking reality at face value means discounting illusions. If you can explain choice as an illusion with no reason, you can also explain anything else that way.


Further it better fits the evidence of similar "goals"/Ultimate values amongst peoples
There is no such evidence. There are loads of people with goals significantly different from mine. Fig. 1. Suicides.

Yep, there are. But there are lots of people with the goal of life
Insufficient. The only option compatible with concluding determinism is, given a set of external circumstances, people being all suicide-- or no suicides. Neither is true.

and there are patterns of suicide in different areas depending on the environmental happenings.
Insufficient patterns. If in a given environment everyone committed suicide you might have a point. Otherwise, there are two variables, one of which leaves plenty of room for free will.

Plus goals like attaining money, a family, freinds, power, are predictably popular.
Only because the people who don't pursue them tend to have removed themselves from your view-- you can call that evolution, but you cannot call it evolution originating the goal-- or even propagating it much unless no suicides are born to hedonist parents. Furthermore, I have no impetus toward such a goal as family-- I should by the biological origins theory, my mother had three children as did my father, albeit myself being the only one between them.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2009 9:08:38 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/10/2009 8:54:35 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 12/9/2009 5:59:54 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 12/9/2009 5:44:31 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 12/9/2009 5:18:25 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 12/9/2009 5:14:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
"goal" and "ultimate value" are synonyms. Other values are derived from and judged by their relation to that set of synonyms.

So these ultimate values are chosen, but you can't describe how they're chosen,
If I could describe effectively, I would have thereby proven determinism.


would you accept that the physical world is a reasonable assumption
A reasonable assumption for...?

Objective reality
The physical world is part of objective reality. Is a finger a reasonable assumption for a hand? I don't get where you're going.

I think it pretty much all comes down to this. I would say that given the experience at hand, physical reality can reasonably be assumed to be a true look at objective reality, until there is good reason to think otherwise. I think that such assumptions are a good way of finding new knowledge, in that it gives you something to make predictions off of and test.

You may dismiss mine, but mine actually ties Ethics to the natural/physical world (through Evolution)
By this you contradict: "mine includes yours"

Either something is determined by nature or it's subject to free will, you can't have it both ways.

Given Phys. reality, I would explain choice as an illusion
Taking reality at face value means discounting illusions. If you can explain choice as an illusion with no reason, you can also explain anything else that way.

I think that Physical reality=objective reality is a reasonable assumption, I think choice can be understood as fitting within the framework of physical reality, :. there is no reason to throw out the assumption: phys. reality=obj. reality
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2009 9:16:45 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/10/2009 8:54:35 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:

The only option compatible with concluding determinism is, given a set of external circumstances, people being all suicide-- or no suicides.

No. 1. people are physically different from the get go.
2. people become physically different through experience; environmental factors have effects upon how your brain develops.

and there are patterns of suicide in different areas depending on the environmental happenings.
Insufficient patterns. If in a given environment everyone committed suicide you might have a point.

see 1 & 2 above.

Otherwise, there are two variables, one of which leaves plenty of room for free will.

Choice/free will the illusion, that can be accounted for given phys. reality. (human nature and circumstance)

Plus goals like attaining money, a family, freinds, power, are predictably popular.
Only because the people who don't pursue them tend to have removed themselves from your view-- you can call that evolution, but you cannot call it evolution originating the goal-- or even propagating it much unless no suicides are born to hedonist parents. Furthermore, I have no impetus toward such a goal as family-- I should by the biological origins theory, my mother had three children as did my father, albeit myself being the only one between them.

lol. Do you have the drive for sex, how bout getting a Gfriend?? In the vast amounts of time (before abortion/condoms) in which we evolved these "cares" they could very well have been enough to land you with a family.

Further your personal exp. is, quite admittedly, a factor.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."