|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Hetzer |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Hetzer
Super Spammer
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :  
|
|
| Back to top |
  |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
 |
| neatbik |
This post is not being displayed .
|
neatbik
World Chat Champion
Joined: 27 Jun 2007
Karma :  
|
 Posted: 13:13 - 16 Nov 2009  Post subject: |
 |
|
Maybe guilt comes into it? I dunno *shrugs*
But then is guilt a natural thing, or is it just rammed down our throats from an early age?
Fuck knows - but will be interesting to read what people have to say  |
|
| Back to top |
 |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Skudd |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Skudd
Super Spammer
Joined: 01 Oct 2006
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Hetzer |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Hetzer
Super Spammer
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Hetzer |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Hetzer
Super Spammer
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| GhostRider |
This post is not being displayed .
|
GhostRider
World Chat Champion
Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Karma :
|
| Posted: 13:23 - 16 Nov 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe it's down to the our internal programming, i.e mans first and foremost instinct is to survive, the second to breed and reproduce, killing another human being, regardless of whether for sport or not, goes against these tennets.
Ok not directly, i.e your killing someone else and not yourself, but something within a person realises that they have gone against the grain and that this should not be occuring within ones own species.
That was my first thought upon reading the thread, I might come up with something more interesting once I've had time to ponder it.
GhostRider
____________________
I have all the characteristics of a human being: blood, flesh, skin, hair; but not a single, clear, identifiable emotion, except for greed and disgust. Something horrible is happening inside of me and I don't know why. My nightly bloodlust has overflown into my days. I feel lethal, on the verge of frenzy. I think my mask of sanity is about to slip. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Devils Advocate |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Devils Advocate
World Chat Champion
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| TheDonUK |
This post is not being displayed .
|
TheDonUK
World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Karma : 
|
| Posted: 13:28 - 16 Nov 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
I think its down to your upbringing.
Not wanting to ashame yourself to your parents/family/friends. Which if you subscribe to that notion then there is no morality at all, only a fear of capture/reprisals...
Its that old thing if you could get away with murder, would you?
____________________
[Current Bikes - GSXR-750 K5 & C90-97 ] [Previous Bikes: Runner 125, YBR 125, GS500, Bandit 600, Hornet 600, ZX6R-99, C90-99, R1-99, XT600E-04, GSXR-750 K4, CRF250L '16] |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Hetzer |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Hetzer
Super Spammer
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :
|
| Posted: 13:35 - 16 Nov 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
But from where comes our "internal programming"? We're born with it? It's inate? How do we come to know what to "believe is right and wrong"?
We're taught it, by society via our parents and teachers, is that not so?
And if it's so, what makes it correct? Who decides? Is it an on-going development, over which no particular person or body has discrete control? Re Lady Chatterley's Lover, once forbidden on moral grounds, now we have hard-core porn on the newsagent shelves. Ok to kill in war, not ok to kill in civvy-street.
There are core components that make sense on a broad basis...thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal...but how about thou shalt not camp here, park there, have that thing, deal that substance? From where do these 'morals' draw their authority? Or can we have laws that have no moral basis?
____________________
"There's the horizon! Ride hard, ride fast and cut down all who stand in your way!" |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Devils Advocate |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Devils Advocate
World Chat Champion
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| smegballs |
This post is not being displayed .
|
smegballs
World Chat Champion
Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Hetzer |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Hetzer
Super Spammer
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Hetzer |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Hetzer
Super Spammer
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :
|
| Posted: 13:53 - 16 Nov 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
| Bittern wrote: | | TheDonUK wrote: |
Its that old thing if you could get away with murder, would you? |
At the moment I would don't really want to kill anyone, however my tolerance for people before I see a bullet as fair is pretty low to most people. To clarify I dont mean that call me a dick and I'll go and toast the schoolyard more along the lines of any of the scum that walk the earth are witnessed by me to being perfoming scummery I'd happily blow them away.
Example, a group of 10-20 kids who have just jumped like 2 or 3 people and are now procedding to kick the fuck out them while they are helpless on the floor..... No problems there with mowing them down.
Not that I want to inflict pain of suffering on anyone, all the scum kids above would each get a bullet to the brain if possible (obviously not happening IRL but would be taken out with "minimal" suffering). I personally don't see killing someone (painlessly) a particularly huge crime, once they dead they won't know they are dead argument etc etc. Its simply a removing the shit from the world, most people don't leave filth in their own houses. Yet the human filth is allowed to propagate and spread throught most cities and nations globally.
Lots of people would probably say my morality is wrong. I basically go against causing unessacery pain to other people/animals etc.
For instance I would consider it a greater crime (in the moral sense not legal) to beat the fuck out of someone resulting in them lose the use of their legs, than to perform a painless kill - arguments sake rifle round to back of the head, never even knew it was coming. Society especially the "Law" would doubtless say that the act of killing was the greater crime, despite there being much less suffering (immediate and future) to the shooting victim than the cripple. |
You are clearly guilty of formulating your own morality, divorced from the morality you have been taught second-hand. But so long as you don't act on it you are guilty of no offence in the eyes of the law.
How does it make you feel to be so constrained by a taught second-hand morality you do not fully embrace?
____________________
"There's the horizon! Ride hard, ride fast and cut down all who stand in your way!" |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| neatbik |
This post is not being displayed .
|
neatbik
World Chat Champion
Joined: 27 Jun 2007
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Devils Advocate |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Devils Advocate
World Chat Champion
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Hetzer |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Hetzer
Super Spammer
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| D O G |
This post is not being displayed .
|
D O G
World Chat Champion
Joined: 18 Dec 2006
Karma :
|
Posted: 14:11 - 16 Nov 2009  Post subject: Re: Human morality. |
|
|
| Hetzer wrote: | What is it? Does it exist? If yes, how does it work? And, most importantly, what gives any particular theory of morality it's authority?
Example: Why is it wrong to kill another human being for sport? If it is, in fact, wrong at all (is it?).
Discuss (or don't, as you wish). |
Personally I believe that it exists only through the 'rules' of any given society, and it continual evolution. For example, in Roman times it was not considered immoral for a middle aged man to have homosexual sex with a young boy. It was in fact endorsed by society and encourged by the boy's parents. Similarly, brutal (by modern standards) fights to the death were considered acceptable sport, where as now they would be considered fundamentally wrong.
What gives any set of 'morals' their authority? I would suggets it is the approval and consensus of a majority of the society which created them.
What is or is not moral is just a concept, a theoretical rule which is not always related to the actual rules of society (e.g. laws). Ideally, one supposes that there should be no divergence between the two, and when there is, the actual laws should be changed to reflect the moral position. For example the abolishment of the death penalty could be seen to be a realigning with UK law to the moral rules of society.  |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Devils Advocate |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Devils Advocate
World Chat Champion
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| snomag |
This post is not being displayed .
|
snomag
Trackday Trickster
Joined: 12 Nov 2008
Karma : 
|
| Posted: 14:23 - 16 Nov 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
| Hetzer wrote: | But from where comes our "internal programming"? We're born with it? It's inate? How do we come to know what to "believe is right and wrong"?
We're taught it, by society via our parents and teachers, is that not so?
And if it's so, what makes it correct? Who decides? Is it an on-going development, over which no particular person or body has discrete control? Re Lady Chatterley's Lover, once forbidden on moral grounds, now we have hard-core porn on the newsagent shelves. Ok to kill in war, not ok to kill in civvy-street.
There are core components that make sense on a broad basis...thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal...but how about thou shalt not camp here, park there, have that thing, deal that substance? From where do these 'morals' draw their authority? Or can we have laws that have no moral basis? |
As soon as we're born, our environment starts forming our personality to one that suits their needs.
Basically when you're a baby, you don't question your parent's or anyone elses word. Whatever they say, you'll consider it to be 100% accurate, and proceed to consume it to be a part of yourself. (later on this'll be your opinion and views)
I do think we're taught it by society, parents, teachers as you point that out. Of course, whatever is being taught heavily depends on the society - as that's where the 'newcommer' has to fit in and 'serve'.
You consider things to be moral, that you can justify based on your past experiences in life. It's funny how sometimes we can be so sure we're 100% correct that we're willing to fight for our truth. Even when there's no possible way to us to know it for sure.
Of course I can be completely wrong . |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Hetzer |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Hetzer
Super Spammer
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :
|
| Posted: 14:28 - 16 Nov 2009 Post subject: Re: Human morality. |
|
|
| Damofo D.O.G. wrote: | | Hetzer wrote: | What is it? Does it exist? If yes, how does it work? And, most importantly, what gives any particular theory of morality it's authority?
Example: Why is it wrong to kill another human being for sport? If it is, in fact, wrong at all (is it?).
Discuss (or don't, as you wish). |
Personally I believe that it exists only through the 'rules' of any given society, and it continual evolution. For example, in Roman times it was not considered immoral for a middle aged man to have homosexual sex with a young boy. It was in fact endorsed by society and encourged by the boy's parents. Similarly, brutal (by modern standards) fights to the death were considered acceptable sport, where as now they would be considered fundamentally wrong.
What gives any set of 'morals' their authority? I would suggets it is the approval and consensus of a majority of the society which created them.
What is or is not moral is just a concept, a theoretical rule which is not always related to the actual rules of society (e.g. laws). Ideally, one supposes that there should be no divergence between the two, and when there is, the actual laws should be changed to reflect the moral position. For example the abolishment of the death penalty could be seen to be a realigning with UK law to the moral rules of society. |
Nice post, it addresses my reason for opening this topic.
The "majority of society". How about the right of the individual. Do you say the right of the individual is secondary to the wishes of the majority? How do you establish where the majority is right or wrong and the individual is right or wrong? Or does that not matter, so long as the majority can enforce their wish upon the individual?
What happens when that individual, feeling so hopelessly oppressed, makes a bomb and blows up a bunch of people in retaliation?
The point is this...does not a system of morality require an authority external to man before it can be irrefutably valid? Before no individual can say "You lot just made that shit up, you can shove it"?
The ten commandments are supposedly the word of god, and core-laws founded upon then draw their authority from the supposed source. But all other laws known to christian man are basically founded upon them too. But how far have we wandered from the core, to the point that millions of people are, effectively, criminals in the eye of the law (drug takers)? "I shall not kill, because god said...but take no drugs? Where did god say that? Men said it, so fvck that."
Now we have millions of people who no longer believe in god, or at least not the biblical god. So what value any law based upon his ten commandments, much less those derived from a tortuously divergent extrapolation of them?
This is the root of my problem...how do we establish a morality-based system of law and order if no greater authority than the mind of man/the majority can be proved?
____________________
"There's the horizon! Ride hard, ride fast and cut down all who stand in your way!" |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| smegballs |
This post is not being displayed .
|
smegballs
World Chat Champion
Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Kickstart |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Kickstart
The Oracle
Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Hetzer |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Hetzer
Super Spammer
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :
|
| Posted: 14:43 - 16 Nov 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
| snomag wrote: | | Hetzer wrote: | But from where comes our "internal programming"? We're born with it? It's inate? How do we come to know what to "believe is right and wrong"?
We're taught it, by society via our parents and teachers, is that not so?
And if it's so, what makes it correct? Who decides? Is it an on-going development, over which no particular person or body has discrete control? Re Lady Chatterley's Lover, once forbidden on moral grounds, now we have hard-core porn on the newsagent shelves. Ok to kill in war, not ok to kill in civvy-street.
There are core components that make sense on a broad basis...thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal...but how about thou shalt not camp here, park there, have that thing, deal that substance? From where do these 'morals' draw their authority? Or can we have laws that have no moral basis? |
As soon as we're born, our environment starts forming our personality to one that suits their needs.
Basically when you're a baby, you don't question your parent's or anyone elses word. Whatever they say, you'll consider it to be 100% accurate, and proceed to consume it to be a part of yourself. (later on this'll be your opinion and views)
I do think we're taught it by society, parents, teachers as you point that out. Of course, whatever is being taught heavily depends on the society - as that's where the 'newcommer' has to fit in and 'serve'.
You consider things to be moral, that you can justify based on your past experiences in life. It's funny how sometimes we can be so sure we're 100% correct that we're willing to fight for our truth. Even when there's no possible way to us to know it for sure.
Of course I can be completely wrong . |
I consider certain things to be moral based upon pure reason. However, it doesn't work. I have tried very hard to devise a simple principle, an irrefutable one, but I fail. A simple principle is always best, it is least open to attack, but I can't get it to work. It founders upon one simple test...
The principle is indded simple...anything is allowed, so long as it does no direct harm to another. This, obviously, pre-supposes the validity of god's word, with a bit of extrapolation.
Ideally I'd like to be able to prove that a morality that forbids harming another can be drawn from an irrefutable source. I think I can do that, but that's another subject.
Having assumed it's valid, it fails the 'Explosives Test'. Possessing explosives, in and of itself, causes no direct harm to another. But in the real world we know there will be accidents or malice. So, how do we square the principle with the pragmatic certainty of potential harm?
Full circle. Morality...law...individual freedom.
As a free individual I believe I have the right to be responsible for myself, so long as I harm no other, and I disregard the given law in all things except those that just happen to be in agreement with me. That, apparently, makes me a criminal. Even though my 'crimes' cause no harm to anyone.
Surely this cannot be right or acceptable? Is it acceptable to anyone else?
Hence the topic.
____________________
"There's the horizon! Ride hard, ride fast and cut down all who stand in your way!" |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Hetzer |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Hetzer
Super Spammer
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Kickstart |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Kickstart
The Oracle
Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Karma :
|
| Posted: 14:48 - 16 Nov 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
Hi
Would agree with the basic principle, but how do you define harm?
Basic level someone who has a house and a nuclear power station is built nearby. To them the direct harm is that their house is now worth less making it difficult to move. But the opposite is also true that without it everyone else is harmed by not having electrical power.
Similar scenario for someone living near and airport / racetrack, or someone having kids and inflicting the costs on others.
All the best
Keith
____________________
Traxpics, track day and racing photographs - Bimota Forum - Bike performance / thrust graphs for choosing gearing |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
 |
Old Thread Alert!
The last post was made 16 years, 296 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful? |
 |
|
|
Help & FAQs
Search BCF
Members
Groups
Events Calendar
rating
rating