by Shining One 102 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Just be aware of the fact that some issues are fuzzy, and so it's difficult to frame them in precise terms.
I don't know, Little Toe. Some of the greatest truths are plain as day. Words, especially many words, get in the way of those great truths. Sometimes the words have to be stripped away to lay bare the grain.
So if there is an universal morality, where is it?
I think there are some, wherever there is life. I tried hinting at them in athiest terms on the other thread. How about:
Reverence for life
Protect the young
Survival of the fittest
Defend the collective (this would be a human moral)
?
Some of the greatest truths are plain as day.
True, but as I said before "some issues are fuzzy", e.g. try describing the absolute truth of "beauty", without resort to metaphor.
As is true of almost all conversations this one devolves down to words themselves.
The focus is on the word "absolute".
What is absolute is everything taken together omitting nothing.
Math can indicate an infinite series by taking a string of numbers and adding a few dots: 1,2,3,4......
But, this is a potential and not an actual.
The difference between a potential ABSOLUTE and an actual is what we live with day to day.
Unless we stipulate that __practically everything __and not __everything__is what humanity is compentent to discuss, then; our debate is rather meaningless.
All of man's life is within a series of contexts. Those contexts have recursive layers. ([{}])
Artificially, within the context of math procedures it is deemed necessary to stipulate you begin inside the innermost brackets and work your way outward. Otherwise, the results are skewed.
So too, in conversations about philosophical and moral procedures unless we accept a standard for each context (as in math) each of us will have a differing result in our conclusions.
2(4+4)=?
If you multiply 2x4 and add +4 you get a different answer from:
starting inside and adding two fours 4+4 and multiplying by 2.
12 does not equal 16.
It is not the truth of math at stake but the procedure. Procedures are context laden and math requires a standard. It is arbitrary. It is for the purpose of keeping everybody on the same page and allowing math to be useful in conforming to certain real-world realities.
That is why I propose we recognise the following:
1.Life is the foundation of all values because without it there can be no values.
2.A long life well-lived can rationally be held to be superior to a short, unhappy and miserable one. (Slippery slope arguments seek to prove there is no black and no white because there is a gray. This ignores the reality of the entire scale.)
3.Man lives by means of his rational mind which requires a focus and effort for him to grasp how reality works and navigate his way through it to personal advantage.
Until and unless we exercise our own mind we are left to hearsay, folk wisdom, old wive's tales, superstition, crackpot theory and urban legend to guide us..
4.What damages man's well-being is to be marked as not merely annoying and dangerous, but, evil and morally repugant. Only by opposing the things which threaten man's well-being can there be an ethical balance to man's life. The corollary is this: by embracing the things which create well-being (healthy living, education, purposeful activity, positive social interaction, etc.) man enables himself and others to progress from mere subsistance to prosperity.Jesus declared we must not resist evil. What logically follows is the evil is visited upon the one not resisting. p.s. Jesus was murdered.
5.Rational ambiguity, to whatever degree it presents itself, is toxic to our thinking. Failure to define our terms and order or contexts, specify our concepts and clarify our intentions leads to a breakdown of our moral compass. The number one indicator of Rational ambiguity is any attempt to disable man's ability to define his values. (Example: Man's knowledge is not valid because it is only a faint approximation.)A rational estimate is better than an unfounded guess. And failure to develop the skill to discriminate lays us bare to become victimized.
6.Intellectual dishonesty is evidence of a damaged morality. This stems from a failure to accept the logic that effects have causes. By disavowing man's ability to determine reality and guide himself, the intellectually dishonest person must turn to some authority with claims of a transcendant connection to TRUTH to guide him. This enslaves him.
Social Liberals turn this on its head and declare that bad behavior can be excused because of a victimized person turning into a predator; as if this were a balance of justice we must allow.
7.The mark of a slave is the apparent inability to make personal decisions such as what is valuable and how one's time is to be spent and on what. The slave is taught his only value is in sacrificing himself on behalf of "others". Altruistic society impresses this upon the smallest child to the oldest citizen. It is our "duty" to others which is said to trump our own well-being.
8.Conversations which begin by declaring something can NOT be known usually proceed from an irrational source. Not all of everything can be known all at once, but, human knowledge accumulates with purpose toward full discovery and utility. Man's mind is capable; not crippled. Only by embracing his own view of himself as weak does man become crippled and easy prey for some Mystic who is eager to control him with promises of a better life if he will surrender his will.
The Argument from Ignorance is hardly a basis for an assertion of understanding.
What guides us toward more and more freedom, ability and prosperity is the willingness to form our values based on clear perception, accurate measurement, orderly arrangement and full endorsement of fact-based examination of reality from every possible angle.
Man's view of reality is visited upon his status quo in the form of his life as a whole. When man is murky in his views and lazy in his purposes he is often transformed into a whining victim railing at the injustice of the universe. He becomes a burden to others demanding his "rights" to be supported by the toil and charity of others who have made more intelligent use of their mind and their time.
I'm going to have to dispute point 2, Terry, as it seems a little too ego-centric for my tastes.
"Ask not what can be done for you, but what you can do for others" (de-nationalised paraphrase).
A short and miserable life still has the potential to enhance that of others, and maybe even mankind. Look at all the young composers, etc., who died young and in conditions that today we would call squalor. Methinks I'd prefer that to a long and indolent life, neh?
Or as a wise man once put it: better to burn out than to fade away
Hi again,
I explained on the other thread why it makes no sense for somebody that believes - as you do - that those of us who don't share your religio-political outlook are going to burn in hell forever to be concerned with debating such matters unless, and only unless, your mission here is to save us from such a fate, and that I can't possibly believe that your intentions are so noble, given the generally nasty tone of the majority of your posts. Did you see it?
A short and miserable life still has the potential to enhance that of others, and maybe even mankind. Look at all the young composers, etc., who died young and in conditions that today we would call squalor. Methinks I'd prefer that to a long and indolent life, neh?
And this is a choice?
Bad things happen to good people. But, the choice to live in bad conditions is not the same as the unwitting birth into poverty. Separating out our causes from the effects is the task at hand. Often people don't better themselves in the mistaken belief they are needed to prop up the weaker ones. This is illogical in the long term and altruistically pure in the short term.
If you don't gain the education and skill to earn a better living to enable your family to achieve the necessities of life--this is in no way morally superior nor even advisable.
There are enough people in history who by sheer effort of will and determination overcame all manner of hardship by using their rational mind. At the same time others collapse into their "needs" and demand they be served "for the greater good" because of this weakness.
None of us can help what we are born into. But, it is our responsibility to catch on and move ahead. Those who serve others cannot bear the weight of unwillingness on either the part of others to help themselves or "selfishly" to gain strength and ability for improvement.
Religion has made each of us very very uncomfortable with the notion that our first duty is to gain as much strength and freedom through self-application on our own behalf than it is to merely prop up the weakness in others.
The more erratic, insane and dangerous cults put MARTYRDOM above all else as a pinnacle achievement! The ultimate "good" becomes literal self-sacrifice.
As General Patton once said rather succinctly: No poor dumb bastard ever served his country by dying for it. You serve your country by making the other poor dumb bastard die for HIS country. :) In a nutshell that is a very practical view.
Choice comes from the freedom to choose. The exercise of our rational mind followed by effort and determination is what breaks us free from debility and launches the progeny of knuckle-draggers into a walk on the moon.
Blah blah blah.
One of the things I loved about leaving the Jehoobahs was that I didnt have to dance on the head of a pin anymore argueing about words, phrases and slight shades of meaning.
try describing the absolute truth of "beauty", without resort to metaphorLittleToe IS beauty. Is that a metaphor? Or a personifiation?
LT:
I'm going to have to dispute point 2, Terry, as it seems a little too ego-centric for my tastes."Ask not what can be done for you, but what you can do for others" (de-nationalised paraphrase).
A short and miserable life still has the potential to enhance that of others, and maybe even mankind. Look at all the young composers, etc., who died young and in conditions that today we would call squalor. Methinks I'd prefer that to a long and indolent life, neh?
Yes, I disagree with his point2 also. The whole concept of morality is that all life is of the same value. Terrys view results in the million same old inconsistencies utilitarianism has always become trapped in. What is a short and miserable life, Terry? And what is a "happy life"? Who decides whether a life is miserable? And who decides whether a "miserable life" is less worth living than a "happy life"? You? Because you wouldn`t like being miserable? Or the one who is actually miserable? The point is: It has nothing to do with potential! Even Bill Gates with all his money that he is giving to charity, is no more worth than the poor little 3-year-old Somalian girl, starving to death in a refugee camp. Because, if we were to believe that Bill Gates was "worth more", then the logical conclusion to that would be to allow the 3-year-old girl (and all the other poor, starving people in this world) to starve away, die and be done with it. Then Bill Gates could use his money contributing to increasing the happiness of the rest of us, who are actually allready ok and well off (but not as well of as Bill Gates). Terry:
As General Patton once said rather succinctly: No poor dumb bastard ever served his country by dying for it. You serve your country by making the other poor dumb bastard die for HIS country. :) In a nutshell that is a very practical view.Ah yes. And without all the poor, dumb bastards who died for the general and for the allied effort during WW2, we would be speaking german all over Europe today. Oh, and tens of millions east-Europeans would have been "relocated" to the mass graves, as well as the rest of the jews, gypsys and homosexuals. No war is fought and won without casualties even on your own team. And those "casualties" have had lives, names, family, dreams, hopes. And they gave all that away for a higher purpose, for something good and right. Following your logic, what they did when they gave up their lives, was shear stupidity.
Terry:
This is illogical in the long term and altruistically pure in the short term.
Why do I hear Mr. Spock, when you write that?
KK:
LittleToe IS beauty. Is that a metaphor? Or a personifiation?
Hyperbole
Hellrider:
I agree, though taking Terry's side for a monent, the old dwarvian adage of "today is a good day for someone else to die" springs to mind
