History Rocks!
1BC Civ Forums
1BC Civ Forums
Home      Members   FAQ   Links
Welcome Guest ( Login | Register )
      


«««678910»»»

History Rocks!Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
9/2/2008 7:08 PM


Udderly ridiculous

Udderly ridiculous

Last Seen:
Yesterday @ 9:11 PM


Posts: 3,613
Visits: 4,363

Back to my earlier example where my brother spilled red Koolaid on my mom's new white carpet and I did it as well, but mine was on purpose and was done out of being vindictive. Do you find fault/sin/bad-karma/whatever on my hypothetical act? I do. What about my brother's clumsiness? I don't. Do you agree on this?

As you stated (Jerm), both end results are the same, so the only real difference is whether or not it was done on purpose, or as I mentioned earlier, one's intent.

Lets say there is a gigantic man with an IQ of 10 (or whatever). If he hugs someone he loves and as he is trying to show them how much he loves them, and while he is hugging hard, he accidentally smothers him/her or breaks a neck, etc. Contrast that to a serial killer who smothers or breaks a neck on purpose. Again, the end result is the same, so is the "sin" the same? I would imagine most people would say its not the same. If that is the case, then it was the intent that makes those acts different.

IF there is a God who judges, in your beliefs, would God judge them both the same?

So in a long winded way to answer your question, Jerm, I believe that in my example up top, I committed evil and my brother did not. I believe the serial killer committed evil and the man with a low IQ did not. So perhaps knowledge is part of the equation, and perhaps if there is a spiritual reason for that little small voice we have in us (conscience, holy spirit, spirit guides, insert whatever belief here) helping us to know that something is wrong... perhaps that is another key part of the equation, but I stand by "intent" being the ultimate key to whether or not a deed was good or evil or neutral.

With my reasons above, belief in a Creator isn't necessary to fulfill that criteria.
9/2/2008 7:15 PM


Day-Saver!

Day-Saver!

Last Seen:
Today @ 2:40 PM


Posts: 5,295
Visits: 27,181

Lets say there is a gigantic man with an IQ of 10 (or whatever). If he hugs someone he loves and as he is trying to show them how much he loves them, and while he is hugging hard, he accidentally smothers him/her or breaks a neck, etc.

What did I do, George, What did I do?

 

9/2/2008 7:31 PM


Udderly ridiculous

Udderly ridiculous

Last Seen:
Yesterday @ 9:11 PM


Posts: 3,613
Visits: 4,363

Its okay, Lenny. Someday we'll have our own farm and live off the land and have bunnies. LOTS of bunnies to pet!

Great book, LC. Thanks for that memory.
9/2/2008 10:06 PM


Elite Pathogen

Elite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite Pathogen

Last Seen:
Today @ 1:58 PM


Posts: 4,390
Visits: 10,911

Of course intent is part of the equation... in fact it's pretty big.  If the bus which was shot up by the gangsters had fallen off a cliff instead and killed every person, it would be a tragedy, not an evil.  If Lenny smothers a girl it's a tragedy not an evil.  Yes the end result is the same but the intent is of course the difference. 

Now for a more gray area.  If a man goes to a plaza or pizza parlour which he knows is packed full of innocent people and blows himself up for Allah, is this act evil?  He believes [presumably] that he is doing good yet is that act in fact evil?  Us westerners certainly think it is but the people he is doing it for think it's actually good.  Who's right?  Is nobody "right" and it's just subjective?  If one of us is in fact right, then the "evil" must be universal... right? 

9/3/2008 6:46 PM
lame duck

lame ducklame ducklame ducklame ducklame ducklame ducklame ducklame duck

Last Seen:
11/17/2008 4:24 PM


Posts: 1,795
Visits: 4,325

Jerm

No absolutes exist. Humanity as a biological system constantly evolves and takes new shapes. It is only logical that or norms and perceptions follow the same path. So no, there isn't an act/instance that can be pointed at as representing absolute universal evel.

What does exist though, are taught values/perceptions and the latest "in things to do".

9/5/2008 11:15 PM


Udderly ridiculous

Udderly ridiculous

Last Seen:
Yesterday @ 9:11 PM


Posts: 3,613
Visits: 4,363

Jerm, do you think the suicide bomber (homicide bomber) thinks he is doing evil? If not, then its subjective, isn't it? Unless you're talking about from God's perspective, if there is such a thing, or a divine perspective, etc, then everything is subjective from a human point of view.

Let me take this another direction. Remember my earlier example about the super wealthy lady's "suffering" because she doesn't know how to cook or buy food, etc, etc and is it less suffering to her experiencing it than something "bigger" (subjective) to you or I? These are judgments, aren't they? If she believes she is suffering, she is. Right? If you lose your job and you don't stress, don't worry, thats a judgment you have made and accepted, correct? Same as a person who loses his/her job in the exact same circumstances as you, but this person freaks out. Thats a judgment/opinion that they accept as reality.

Do you agree?

If so, what if no one judged? Ever. Is that either closer to Utopia or to an emotionless Vulcan-like society? Which one?
9/7/2008 11:38 PM


Elite Pathogen

Elite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite Pathogen

Last Seen:
Today @ 1:58 PM


Posts: 4,390
Visits: 10,911

Here is how I see it.  If there is no God or (law giver) then morality is subjective.  It would be essentially what you guys are saying.  Morality would be in the eye of the beholder.  If there was a God (at least in the form that we think of, the Judeo-Christian God), wouldn't there be a degree of absolutism?  Sure there are cultural differences that I'm sure a good God would not care about in the least and perhaps there would be very few absolutes, especially if he can't (or won't) communicate with everyone equally.  This is why I'm trying to limit this discussion to something we can all agree upon that is evil (and at this point, I'm honestly not trying to convince but explore). 

So, following this line of reasoning, it doesn't matter what the perpetrator thinks if there is a God governing the universe and who laid down a law to humanity.  If the suicide bomber is wrong, he's also evil, or at least the act itself is evil.  If he's right, then he's not.  So, the question I am asking is, if there is no god, can morality in any way be absolute?  So far, I'm getting that it's 'no'.  Am I wrong?

9/8/2008 2:50 AM


Conscript Rabbi

Conscript RabbiConscript RabbiConscript RabbiConscript RabbiConscript RabbiConscript RabbiConscript RabbiConscript Rabbi

Last Seen:
Today @ 2:19 PM


Posts: 2,119
Visits: 8,224

I have been following this thread silently. Nothing wrong, but it will just be more properly placed in P&R.
Moving....
9/8/2008 9:51 AM


Udderly ridiculous

Udderly ridiculous

Last Seen:
Yesterday @ 9:11 PM


Posts: 3,613
Visits: 4,363

Yes it probably should have been here in P&R all along.